Encouraging the Provision of New Technologies and Services to the Public, 14395-14400 [2018-06741]
Download as PDF
14395
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Vaccine
Illness, disability, injury or condition
covered
XVII. Any new vaccine recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention for routine administration to children and/or pregnant women, after
publication by the Secretary of a notice of coverage.
A. Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration.
B. Vasovagal syncope ...........................
[FR Doc. 2018–06770 Filed 4–3–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150–28–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[GN Docket No. 18–22; FCC 18–18]
Encouraging the Provision of New
Technologies and Services to the
Public
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission is committed to improving
the process for enabling the
introduction of new technologies and
services that serve the public interest
and made available to the public on a
timely basis. Therefore, the Commission
proposes guidelines and procedures to
implement.
SUMMARY:
Comments are due May 4, 2018.
Reply comments are due May 21, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Murray, Office of Engineering and
Technology, 202–418–0688,
Paul.Murray@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, GN Docket No.
18–22, FCC 18–18, adopted February 22,
2018, and released February 23, 2018.
The full text of this document is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Reference Center (Room CY–A257),
445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC
20554. The full text may also be
downloaded at: https://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_
Business/2018/db0223/FCC-1818A1.pdf. People with Disabilities: To
request materials in accessible formats
for people with disabilities (braille,
large print, electronic files, audio
format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov
or call the Consumer & Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice),
202–418–0432 (tty).
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
Synopsis
1. Background. Section 7, entitled
‘‘New Technologies and Services,’’
reads in its entirety as follows:
(a) It shall be the policy of the United
States to encourage the provision of new
technologies and services to the public.
Any person or party (other than the
Commission) who opposes a new
technology or service proposed to be
permitted under this Act shall have the
burden to demonstrate that such
proposal is inconsistent with the public
interest.
(b) The Commission shall determine
whether any new technology or service
proposed in a petition or application is
in the public interest within one year
after such petition or application is
filed. If the Commission initiates its
own proceeding for a new technology or
service, such proceeding shall be
completed within 12 months after it is
initiated.
2. Discussion. In this NPRM, the
Commission proposes to adopt rules
describing guidelines and procedures to
implement the stated policy goal of
section 7 ‘‘to encourage the provision of
new technologies and services to the
public.’’ Although the forces of
competition and technological growth
work together to enable the
development and deployment of many
new technologies and services to the
public, the Commission has at times
been slow to identify and take action to
ensure that important new technologies
or services are made available as quickly
as possible. The Commission has sought
to overcome these impediments by
streamlining many of its processes, but
all too often regulatory delays can
adversely impact newly proposed
technologies or services.
3. Section 7 reflects clear
Congressional intent to encourage and
expedite provision of technological
innovation that would serve the public
interest. To better align purpose and
practice, the Commission propose a set
of rules that will allow the Commission
to effectively breathe life into section 7.
As noted above, this law applies to new
technologies or services proposed to be
permitted in a petition or application, as
well as to Commission-initiated
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Time period for first
symptom or manifestation of onset or
of significant aggravation after vaccine
administration
≤48 hours.
≤1 hour.
proceedings for new technologies and
services.
4. By its terms, § 7 could apply to any
petition or application that includes a
proposal involving the use of new
technologies and services. Accordingly,
the Commission proposes to interpret
§ 7 to include petitions for rulemaking
or waiver of the Commission’s rules as
well as applications for authorization of
any type of technology or service within
the Commission’s statutory purview,
whether radio-based, wired, or
otherwise. The Commission also
proposes to interpret § 7 to apply to any
petitions or applications that properly
could be resolved either by the
Commission or by any Bureau or Office
pursuant to delegated authority.
Whether the Commission itself, or a
particular Bureau or Office acting on
delegated authority, would address the
§ 7-related issue would depend on the
particular filing, the nature of the
request, and the kind of decision(s) and
course(s) of action regarding the
proposed new technology or service that
may be deemed appropriate under the
circumstances.
5. The Commission proposes adopting
a new subpart in part 1 that sets forth
specific procedures and timetables for
action with respect to requests in
petitions or applications for § 7
consideration. These procedures and
timetables are designed to ensure that
the Commission or Bureau/Office
identifies and moves swiftly to promote
new technologies and services that are
in the public interest. These new rules
would not replace or substitute for the
Commission’s existing rules for
processing petitions and applications
(e.g., the part 1 rules for rulemaking
proceedings and for applications
involving common carriers or wireless
radio services, the part 25 rules for
satellite service applications, the part 73
and 74 rules for broadcast service
applications, among many other rule
parts dealing with applications).
Instead, they would specify additional
steps to ensure that timely decisions are
made on § 7 requests suited to serve the
public interest.
6. Section 7 establishes a timeline by
which the Commission must determine
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
14396
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
whether a new technology or service
proposed in a petition or application is
in the public interest—i.e., one year
after a petition or application that
proposes a new technology or service is
filed. However, the statute does not
provide clear guidance about how to
evaluate requests for consideration
under § 7, nor does it prescribe what
form of action the Commission must
take when making a public interest
finding about the proposed new
technology or service. The rules that the
Commission proposes, described below,
are designed to provide such guidance
and would ensure that any petition or
application that includes a § 7-related
request is evaluated under a coherent
and consistent set of procedures.
7. Filing Requirements and Related
Factors. The Commission proposes
specific filing requirements for petitions
and applications that include a request
for section 7 consideration. As noted
above, while the existing procedures for
any particular petition or application
would remain applicable, the voluntary
inclusion of a § 7 request would require
that additional steps be taken to address
whether a new technology or service is
being proposed that would serve the
public interest and, if so, what specific
course of action should be taken to
promote such technology or service. The
Commission, or the appropriate Bureau
or Office, in exercising its discretion,
would make a public interest
determination concerning the proposed
technology or service, with any
qualifying § 7 request requiring further
action within one year.
8. The Commission proposes that a
petitioner or applicant must expressly
request consideration under section 7 at
the time of the initial filing, and must
include a detailed description of the
proposed ‘‘new technology or service’’
and how it differs from existing
technologies or services. In addition, the
§ 7 request must include both
qualitative and quantitative analyses
showing how such new technology or
service would be in the public interest.
The Commission also proposes to codify
a set of factors, described below, all of
which the petitioner or applicant must
address with respect to its § 7 request in
the proceeding, and by which the
Commission or the Bureau or Office will
evaluate whether the proposed
technology or service is ‘‘new’’ and
would serve the public interest.
9. First, because the timeline for a
Commission public interest finding
regarding a § 7 request is only one year
from the filing date of the petition or
application that proposes a new
technology or service, the Commission
proposes that the petition or application
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
include a separate § 7 request that
demonstrates that the new technology or
service proposed is both technically
feasible and available for commercial
use/application, not merely theoretical
or speculative, so that the public
benefits from the proposed new
technology or service can be evaluated
in a meaningful way and can be realized
as soon as practicable.
10. Second, to evaluate the merits of
a section 7 request, the Commission
proposes several categories of factors to
identify whether proposed technologies
or services would be considered ‘‘new.’’
In considering these factors, we note
that determining what is ‘‘new’’ will not
always be easy, particularly considering
that technologies and services in the
communications industry are often
evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
Petitions and applications that include
a § 7 request would be required to
include a sufficient demonstration that
the proposed technology or service
meets one or more of the specified
factors. For example, if the proposed
technology or service has not previously
been authorized by the Commission, the
§ 7 request in the petition or application
must explain how the function and
performance of the technology or
service differs in essential or
fundamental respects from others that
are already authorized. If the proposed
technology or service would make
extraordinary or truly significant
enhancements to a previouslyauthorized technology or service, the § 7
request in the petition or application
would need to specifically quantify,
qualify, or otherwise explain in
sufficient detail what is so new that it
warrants consideration under § 7.
11. Finally, the Commission proposes
that the request for § 7 consideration
must show that the proposed new
technology or service would be in the
public interest by, for example,
promoting innovation and investment,
providing new competitive choices,
providing new technologies that enable
accessibility to people with disabilities,
or meeting public demand for new or
significantly improved services in
unserved and underserved areas.
12. In addition, the underlying
petition or application that includes the
§ 7 request must comply with other legal
or regulatory requirements applicable to
consideration of the various technical
and policy issues raised in the petition
or application, including, as applicable,
any statutory requirements and the
established licensing rules and rights of
existing licensees, regulatees, or users.
Petitions and applications, including
the § 7-related proposal, shall be filed
electronically using the Commission
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
database that is appropriate for the type
of petition or application being filed,
and a copy also shall be sent
electronically to the Chief(s) of the
authorizing Bureau(s) or Office(s) (e.g.,
Wireless Telecommunications, Wireline
Competition, International, and/or
Media Bureaus) as well as the Chief of
the Office of Engineering and
Technology, or to an appropriate
mailbox designated by them. The
petitioner or applicant must make clear
in the filing that it is seeking
consideration under section 7.
13. The proposed technological and
service factors that we propose to adopt
are intended to single out for
consideration and action those
proposals that involve significant
breakthroughs or are truly innovative,
rather than those that are foreseeable or
incremental outgrowths of existing
technologies or services. The
Commission seeks comment on these
factors or other factors that would be
appropriate with effective
implementation of § 7 goals. What
indicia should the Commission use
when evaluating what would constitute
a ‘‘new’’ technology, as distinguished
from an existing or evolving technology?
Similarly, the Commission requests
comment on what would constitute a
‘‘new’’ service, as distinguished from
existing services, and thus be subject to
§ 7 consideration.
14. Processing and Initial Assessment.
The proposed rules would provide for
processing of a § 7 request that is
included as part of a petition or
application as follows. When a petition
or application that includes a § 7 request
is filed, both the authorizing Bureau(s)/
Office(s) and the Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) will review the
filing and issue a public notice on both
the petition/application and the § 7
request. OET will assemble a team of
Commission staff with relevant
expertise, including at least one
representative from any Bureau(s) or
Office(s) with subject matter expertise,
to conduct an initial review to
determine if the § 7 request is complete
and will be accepted for filing. The
Commission proposes that the filing
date of the request for consideration
under § 7, and hence the initiation of
the review period under the § 7 process,
will be the date that the petition/
application including the § 7 request is
complete as filed, and thus can be
accepted for filing.
15. A public notice will be issued
after the authorizing Bureau(s)/Office(s)
and the OET-led review team
determines that the petition or
application, including the § 7 request, is
complete and ready for processing. This
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
review would ensure that the petition or
application that includes a § 7 claim
complies both with the § 7-related
requirements proposed and the other
legal or regulatory requirements
applicable to the particular petition or
application. This Public Notice will
identify the date the request was
complete as filed, as well as relevant
deadlines for agency action.
16. 90-Day Determination. Next, the
Commission proposes that the OET-led
team will determine whether the
technology or service proposed qualifies
as a new technology or service for
consideration under section 7 within 90
days. To the extent appropriate or
necessary, such determination could
take into consideration any comments,
including any oppositions, received in
response to the public notice regarding
the § 7 request. The OET-led team will
notify the petitioner or applicant in
writing of its determination within 90
days after the public notice is issued, or
sooner where appropriate or practicable,
and its determination will be included
in the public record of the particular
proceeding relating to the petition or
application. This determination would
promote timely Commission or Bureau/
Office action to enable the provision of
new technologies or services to the
public that could serve the public
interest.
17. If the determination is positive—
that is, that the request qualifies for § 7
treatment—we propose to commit the
agency to swift action, consistent with
§ 7, to evaluate that technology or
service. Conversely, the Commission
proposes not to make a negative finding
binding on the agency. Because this
determination too will necessarily be
conducted prior to a more complete
evaluation by the Commission or the
Bureau/Office of the various public
interest benefits associated either with
the particular petition/application or the
proposed technology/service, the
Commission or Bureau/Office, which
would be informed of the OET-led
determination, may itself later
determine that a particular petition/
application’s proposed technology or
service initially deemed ineligible
nonetheless may ultimately merit § 7
treatment. Additionally, the
Commission seeks comment on what
the proper notification-and-elevation
process should be before releasing the
90-day determination, whether positive
or negative. For instance, should OET
notify the offices of the Commissioners
48 hours in advance, or some other
length of time, of a pending 90-day
determination? Should two
Commissioners or a majority of the
Commission be required to elevate the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
90-day determination to a Commissionlevel vote? If elevated, how can we
ensure prompt voting? For example,
would five calendar days from elevation
be sufficient time for Commissioners to
register a vote? If a quorum of
commissioners registers a vote by the
deadline, should Commissioners not
registering a vote be marked as ‘‘not
participating’’? If less than a quorum of
Commissioners registers a vote, should
the OET-led team release the 90-day
determination on its own?
18. The Commission also proposes
not to entertain petitions for
reconsideration or applications for
review of the 90-day determination.
First, the determination only guides
agency process and would not in itself
constitute a final Commission or
Bureau/Office order, decision, report, or
action with respect to the particular
petition/application or the public
interest regarding use of the proposed
technology/service. Those public
interest determinations fall squarely
within the purview of the Commission
or the Bureau/Office, which has the
authority and responsibility to evaluate
the various elements of the petition or
application as well as the use of the
proposed technology or service set forth
in the petition or application, and to
make associated public interest
findings. Thus, the OET-led team’s
evaluation of the § 7 request would
merely serve as a step in the overall
process of considering the proposed
technology or service included in the
underlying petition or application and
reaching the merits of the public interest
determinations. Subjecting the OET-led
staff determination to immediate and
formal reconsideration could have the
perverse effect of slowing consideration
of the more important core issues that
are before the Commission or Bureau/
Office for determination—namely, the
merits and public interest associated
with the particular petition or
application (and its constituent pieces),
and how best to ensure that the
proposed technology or service
(whether new or not) can be used to
serve the public. Such early formal
review could also result in scarce staff
resources remaining focused on the
extent to which a technology or service
is ‘‘new,’’ which can be a complicated
or involved question, thus diverting
needed resources away from the more
important question of how best to
address the underlying issues. We also
note that while a negative determination
would not be reviewable upon issuance,
parties nonetheless would have the
opportunity to comment on the
determination and ask that the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14397
Commission or Bureau/Office reach a
different conclusion when it evaluates
the full record and takes action with
respect to the petition/application or the
proposed technology/service.
19. As required by section 7, any
person or party (other than the
Commission) who opposes a new
technology or service has the burden to
demonstrate that such a new technology
or service is inconsistent with the
public interest. For example, it would
not be sufficient for someone to oppose
a proposed technology or service merely
because it might cause economic harm
to its own service or disrupt a particular
sector of the economy; the statute’s
stated goal to promote new technologies
and services in effect requires that
opponents address the potential public
interest associated with the proposed
technology or service, not their own
private interests.
20. Commission or Bureau/Office
Review. For any petition/application
proposing a technology or service that
receives a positive 90-day
determination, the Commission or
Bureau/Office will evaluate the record
once complete, and decide within a year
of the filing date the appropriate course
of action with respect to the petition or
application.
21. Although § 7 requires timely
action by the Commission, it does not
create a presumption in favor of
granting (in whole or part) any
particular petition or application that
includes a proposal to provide such new
technology or service. Indeed, it grants
the agency plenary authority to dispose
of the petition or application as it sees
fit, including by initiating its own
proceeding to explore matters further.
22. In cases where the 90-day
determination is positive, to the extent
the Commission or Bureau/Office
determines that the petition/application
proposes a technology or service that
qualifies under § 7, it would be
obligated to take some concrete action
within one year that advances the
development and use of new
technologies or services that are in the
public interest. The Commission seeks
comment on how to apply these
procedures in instances where outside
parties are either collaborating on or
disputing the merits of a new
technology or service. Should the
Commission take these types of
considerations into account when
determining how to meet the one year
deadline imposed by a § 7 finding? In
contrast, if the Commission or the
Bureau/Office finds that a petition/
application is not proposing use of new
technologies or services, and thus does
not include any request that qualifies for
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
14398
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
consideration under Section 7, that
petition/application would be handled
under the existing Commission
processes that apply generally to
petitions and applications under the
applicable rules.
23. Pending Petitions and
Applications. The new rules and
procedures discussed above would
apply with respect to all newly filed
petitions or applications that include a
§ 7 request. For any petition or
application already pending at the time
that the new rules would become
effective, the Commission proposes a
variant of this approach to
accommodate any petitioner or
applicant who also seeks consideration
under § 7. In such cases, the petitioner
or applicant would supplement its filing
with a specific § 7 request that meets the
criteria outlined above, which would be
followed by issuance of a public notice
focused on the § 7-specific request, the
90-day determination, and action within
a year of the filing if merited.
24. Commission-initiated Proceedings.
Section 7 provides that if the
Commission initiates its own
proceeding for a new technology or
service, such proceeding must be
completed within a year after it is
initiated. The Commission seek
comments on how to ensure the
Commission complies with this
statutory provision. For instance, what
factors should the Commission weigh in
deciding whether to initiate a
proceeding on its own under § 7?
Additionally, when the Commission
itself does initiate a proceeding that it
determines would trigger the § 7
timeline, should it identify the type of
action(s) that it plans to complete
within a year that would promote such
new technology or service, so that it can
in fact complete such action(s) within
one year, or, does the statutory
provision require a final order? The
Commission also seeks comment on the
various issues raised above and on
alternative approaches to implementing
procedures to ensure compliance with
the § 7 requirements.
Procedural Matters
25. Paperwork Reduction Analysis.
This document contains proposed new
or modified information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general
public and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) to comment on the
information collection requirements
contained in this document, as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
pursuant to the Small Business
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4),
the Commission seek specific comment
on how we might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
26. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, the Commission has
prepared an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the
possible significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities of
the policies and rules proposed in the
FNPRM. The IRFA is found in
Appendix B. The Commission requests
written public comment on the IRFA.
Comments must be filed in accordance
with the same filing deadlines as
comments filed in response to the
NPRM, and must have a separate and
distinct heading designating them as
responses to the IRFA. The
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, will send a copy of
this NPRM, including the IRFA, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
27. Comment Filing Procedures.
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 the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121 (1998).
D Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://apps.fcc.gov/
ecfs/.
D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy 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.
D 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand
deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes and boxes must be disposed
of before entering the building.
D Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD
20701.
D U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street SW,
Washington DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
418–0432 (TTY).
28. The proceeding that this Notice
initiates shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
Persons making ex parte presentations
must file a copy of any written
presentation or a memorandum
summarizing any oral presentation
within two business days after the
presentation (unless a different deadline
applicable to the Sunshine period
applies). Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with rule
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
rule 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
Ordering Clauses
29. It is ordered that, pursuant to §§ 1,
4(i), 4(j) and 7 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j) and 157, this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
30. It is ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Notice of Proposed Rule Making,
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, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements and Telecommunications.
Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
The Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 1 as follows:
Part 1 of Title 47 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is proposed to be
amended as follows:
■ 1. The authority citation of part 1
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 34–39, 151, 154(i),
154(j), 155, 157, 160, 201, 225, 227, 303, 309,
332, 1403, 1404, 1451, 1452 and 1455.
PART 1—PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE
■
2. Add Subpart U to read as follows:
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
Subpart U—Implementation of Section
7 of the Communications Act: New
Technologies and Services
Sec.
1.6000 Purpose and scope.
1.6001 Terms and definitions.
1.6002 Filing requirements for petitions and
applications in which consideration
under section 7 is requested.
1.6003 Processing procedures for petitions
or applications, including a
determination within 90 days.
1.6004 Evaluating new technologies and
services proposed in petitions or
applications.
1.6005 Commission or Bureau/Office
review.
1.6006 Commission-initiated proceedings
for new technologies or services.
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 157.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
§ 1.6000
Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to
set out the procedures and terms by
which the Commission will implement
the provisions of § 7 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 157, to encourage
the provision of new technologies and
services to the public. The procedures
set forth in this subpart shall apply with
respect to any petition or application
proposing use of a new technology or
service in which the petitioner or
applicant requests consideration under
section 7.
(b) The rules and procedures set forth
in this subpart do not replace or
substitute for the Commission’s existing
rules and procedures for processing that
apply with respect to the particular
petition or application submitted for
consideration.
§ 1.6001
Terms and definitions.
(a) Terms used in this subpart have
the following meanings:
Petition or application. Any request
for Commission action, as required
under the Communications Act or the
Commission’s rules, including, but not
limited to, petitions for rulemaking,
petitions for waiver of Commission
rules, and applications for authorization
to provide technologies or services to
the public.
Service. An activity, method, or
system that provides to the public the
means of meeting a public need
including, but not limited to,
communications, industrial, or
scientific uses authorized under the
Communications Act.
Technology. The application of
scientific knowledge in engineering to
solve problems or invent useful tools for
practical, industrial, or scientific uses
that rely on radio-frequency, wired, or
other means authorized under the
Communications Act.
(b) For purposes of this subpart, the
following dates shall apply:
(1) A petition or application that
includes a proposal to permit use of a
new technology or service, and for
which the petitioner or applicant
specifically requests consideration
under § 7, shall be deemed filed as of
the date when the petition or
application, including the request for
consideration under section 7, is
complete as filed; such date shall be
used for computing the beginning date
pursuant to § 1.4(b) of this part.
(2) If the Commission initiates its own
proceeding for a new technology or
service under § 7, the beginning date for
the action taken is computed pursuant
to § 1.4(b) of this part.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14399
§ 1.6002 Filing requirements for petitions
and applications in which consideration
under section 7 is requested.
(a) If a petitioner or applicant seeks
consideration under § 7, the petition or
application shall include an express
request for consideration under § 7
when the petition or application
initially is filed.
(b) The petition or application shall
include:
(1) A detailed description of the
proposed technology or service
associated with the petition or
application, and how it differs from
existing technologies or services;
(2) A demonstration that the proposed
technology or service satisfies
§ 1.6004(a) and one or more of the
factors in § 1.6004(b), and
(3) A showing that the use of the
proposed technology or service would
be in the public interest as set forth in
§ 1.6004(c).
(c) The petition or application shall
comply with any legal or procedural
requirements for the type of request
being filed, whether required by statute,
judicial precedent or Commission rules
in this chapter, or include a request for
waiver of Commission requirements.
(d) The petition or application shall
be filed electronically through the
Commission database that is appropriate
for the type of request being filed, and
a copy of the petition or application
shall be sent electronically to the
Chief(s) of the authorizing Bureau and/
or Office and the Chief, Office of
Engineering and Technology (OET), or
to an appropriate mailbox designated by
them.
(e) Section 7 consideration for
pending petitions or applications. If a
petition or application is already
pending before the Commission at the
time the rules in this subpart become
effective, a petitioner or applicant that
seeks § 7 consideration must submit an
express request for consideration under
§ 7 that sets forth how it meets the
specific requirements set forth in this
section.
§ 1.6003 Processing procedures for
petitions or applications, including a
determination within 90 days.
(a) With regard to the specific request
for consideration under § 7, the Office of
Engineering and Technology (OET) will
assemble a team of Commission staff
with appropriate expertise, including at
least one representative from any
Bureau(s) or Office(s) with subject
matter expertise, to review the request
to determine if it is complete and can be
accepted for filing pursuant to
§ 1.6001(b)(1). The team will determine
whether the request provides the
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
14400
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
information required by §§ 1.6002 and
1.6004 of this part and complies with
any other legal or procedural
requirements necessary for processing.
(b) When the underlying petition or
application is complete and accepted for
filing, consistent with applicable rules
and procedures, and the request for
consideration under § 7 is complete and
accepted for filing pursuant to
paragraph (a) of this section, a public
notice seeking comment on the petition
or application, including the proposed
technology or service that the petitioner
or applicant asserts as qualifying for § 7
consideration, will be issued. This
public notice will identify the date that
the petition or application and the
section 7 request is complete as filed, as
well as any other relevant deadlines for
agency action.
(c) Any person or party (other than
the Commission) who opposes a new
technology or service proposed by the
petitioner or applicant shall have the
burden to demonstrate that such
proposed technology or service is
inconsistent with the public interest.
(d) The OET-led team will make a
determination within 90 days of the
issuance of the public notice as to
whether the technology or service
proposed to be permitted qualifies as a
new technology or service for
consideration under § 7. This team will
make this determination by evaluation
the § 7 request pursuant to the factors
set forth in § 1.6004 of this part.
(1) The OET-led team will notify the
petitioner or applicant in writing of its
determination within these 90 days.
(2) The determination will be
included in the public record in the
proceeding.
(3) The Commission and Bureau(s)/
Office(s) with subject matter expertise
will be informed of this determination.
(4) This determination is not subject
to review in petitions for
reconsideration or applications for
review.
(e) To the extent that the OET-led
team determines that the request
qualifies for § 7 treatment, the agency
shall be committed to taking swift
action to evaluate the technology or
service. A determination by the OET-led
team that the request does not qualify
for § 7 treatment is not binding on the
agency, and the Commission or the
Bureau/Office may determine in its
evaluation of the record that the request
merits § 7 treatment.
§ 1.6004 Evaluating the new technologies
or services proposed in petitions or
applications.
(a) The proposed technology or
service shall be technically feasible and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Apr 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
commercially viable; the Commission
will not consider a proposed technology
or service that is merely theoretical or
speculative. Petitioners or applicants
shall include a showing of technical
feasibility and commercial viability for
the proposed technology or service by
including, for example, the results of
experimental testing, technical analysis,
or research.
(b) The proposed technology or
service will be evaluated using one or
more of the following factors.
(1) The technology or service has not
previously been authorized by the
Commission. This could include
combining a previously-approved
technology in new ways to improve
performance or functionalities. The
petition or application shall explain
how the function and/or performance of
the proposed technology or service
differs in essential or fundamental
respects from previously-approved
technologies or services.
(2) The proposed technology or
service is similar to one previously
authorized but includes significant
enhancements that result in new
functionalities or improved
performance. The petition or
application shall explain how the
proposed technology or service differs
from previously-approved technologies
or services, and shall specifically
quantify or qualify the improvements in
functionality or performance or
otherwise explain in sufficient detail
what is so new that it warrants
consideration under § 7.
(3) Other factors set forth by the
petitioner or applicant, or factors that
the Commission deems appropriate for
the specific technology or service that is
proposed.
(c) The petition or application shall
include a showing that the proposed
new technology or service would be in
the public interest by, for example,
explaining how the proposed
technology or service would promote
innovation and investment, provide
new competitive choices to the public,
provide new technologies that enable
accessibility to people with disabilities,
or meet public demand for new or
significantly improved services in
unserved and underserved areas.
§ 1.6005
review.
Commission or Bureau/Office
(a) For any petition/application
including a proposed technology or
service that receives a positive 90-day
determination, the Commission or
Bureau/Office will evaluate the record
once complete, and decide within a year
of the filing date the appropriate course
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of action with respect to the petition or
application.
(b) Although § 7 requires timely
action by the Commission, it does not
create a presumption in favor of
granting (in whole or part) any
particular petition or application that
includes a proposal to provide such new
technology or service. The agency
retains plenary authority to dispose of
the petition or application and the
proposed technology or service as it sees
fit, including by initiating its own
proceeding to explore matters further.
(c) In cases where the 90-day
assessment is positive, to the extent the
Commission or Bureau/Office
determines that the petition or
application proposes a technology or
service that qualifies under § 7, it would
be obligated to take some concrete
action within one year that advances the
development and use of new
technologies or services that are in the
public interest.
(d) If the Commission or the Bureau/
Office finds that a petition or
application is not proposing use of new
technologies or services, and thus does
not include any request that qualifies for
consideration under section 7, that
petition or application would be
handled under the existing Commission
processes that apply generally to
petitions and applications under the
applicable rules.
§ 1.6006 Commission-initiated
proceedings for new technologies or
services.
If the Commission initiates its own
proceeding for a new technology or
service, such proceeding must be
completed within a year after it is
initiated.
[FR Doc. 2018–06741 Filed 4–3–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 170322299–8284–01]
RIN 0648–BG75
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Electronic
Reporting for Federally Permitted
Charter Vessels and Headboats in
Atlantic Fisheries
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14395-14400]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06741]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[GN Docket No. 18-22; FCC 18-18]
Encouraging the Provision of New Technologies and Services to the
Public
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission is committed to improving the
process for enabling the introduction of new technologies and services
that serve the public interest and made available to the public on a
timely basis. Therefore, the Commission proposes guidelines and
procedures to implement.
DATES: Comments are due May 4, 2018. Reply comments are due May 21,
2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Murray, Office of Engineering and
Technology, 202-418-0688, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, GN Docket No. 18-22, FCC 18-18, adopted
February 22, 2018, and released February 23, 2018. The full text of
this document is available for inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th
Street SW, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may also be downloaded
at: https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0223/FCC-18-18A1.pdf. People with Disabilities: To request materials
in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected]
or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530
(voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).
Synopsis
1. Background. Section 7, entitled ``New Technologies and
Services,'' reads in its entirety as follows:
(a) It shall be the policy of the United States to encourage the
provision of new technologies and services to the public. Any person or
party (other than the Commission) who opposes a new technology or
service proposed to be permitted under this Act shall have the burden
to demonstrate that such proposal is inconsistent with the public
interest.
(b) The Commission shall determine whether any new technology or
service proposed in a petition or application is in the public interest
within one year after such petition or application is filed. If the
Commission initiates its own proceeding for a new technology or
service, such proceeding shall be completed within 12 months after it
is initiated.
2. Discussion. In this NPRM, the Commission proposes to adopt rules
describing guidelines and procedures to implement the stated policy
goal of section 7 ``to encourage the provision of new technologies and
services to the public.'' Although the forces of competition and
technological growth work together to enable the development and
deployment of many new technologies and services to the public, the
Commission has at times been slow to identify and take action to ensure
that important new technologies or services are made available as
quickly as possible. The Commission has sought to overcome these
impediments by streamlining many of its processes, but all too often
regulatory delays can adversely impact newly proposed technologies or
services.
3. Section 7 reflects clear Congressional intent to encourage and
expedite provision of technological innovation that would serve the
public interest. To better align purpose and practice, the Commission
propose a set of rules that will allow the Commission to effectively
breathe life into section 7. As noted above, this law applies to new
technologies or services proposed to be permitted in a petition or
application, as well as to Commission-initiated proceedings for new
technologies and services.
4. By its terms, Sec. 7 could apply to any petition or application
that includes a proposal involving the use of new technologies and
services. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to interpret Sec. 7 to
include petitions for rulemaking or waiver of the Commission's rules as
well as applications for authorization of any type of technology or
service within the Commission's statutory purview, whether radio-based,
wired, or otherwise. The Commission also proposes to interpret Sec. 7
to apply to any petitions or applications that properly could be
resolved either by the Commission or by any Bureau or Office pursuant
to delegated authority. Whether the Commission itself, or a particular
Bureau or Office acting on delegated authority, would address the Sec.
7-related issue would depend on the particular filing, the nature of
the request, and the kind of decision(s) and course(s) of action
regarding the proposed new technology or service that may be deemed
appropriate under the circumstances.
5. The Commission proposes adopting a new subpart in part 1 that
sets forth specific procedures and timetables for action with respect
to requests in petitions or applications for Sec. 7 consideration.
These procedures and timetables are designed to ensure that the
Commission or Bureau/Office identifies and moves swiftly to promote new
technologies and services that are in the public interest. These new
rules would not replace or substitute for the Commission's existing
rules for processing petitions and applications (e.g., the part 1 rules
for rulemaking proceedings and for applications involving common
carriers or wireless radio services, the part 25 rules for satellite
service applications, the part 73 and 74 rules for broadcast service
applications, among many other rule parts dealing with applications).
Instead, they would specify additional steps to ensure that timely
decisions are made on Sec. 7 requests suited to serve the public
interest.
6. Section 7 establishes a timeline by which the Commission must
determine
[[Page 14396]]
whether a new technology or service proposed in a petition or
application is in the public interest--i.e., one year after a petition
or application that proposes a new technology or service is filed.
However, the statute does not provide clear guidance about how to
evaluate requests for consideration under Sec. 7, nor does it
prescribe what form of action the Commission must take when making a
public interest finding about the proposed new technology or service.
The rules that the Commission proposes, described below, are designed
to provide such guidance and would ensure that any petition or
application that includes a Sec. 7-related request is evaluated under
a coherent and consistent set of procedures.
7. Filing Requirements and Related Factors. The Commission proposes
specific filing requirements for petitions and applications that
include a request for section 7 consideration. As noted above, while
the existing procedures for any particular petition or application
would remain applicable, the voluntary inclusion of a Sec. 7 request
would require that additional steps be taken to address whether a new
technology or service is being proposed that would serve the public
interest and, if so, what specific course of action should be taken to
promote such technology or service. The Commission, or the appropriate
Bureau or Office, in exercising its discretion, would make a public
interest determination concerning the proposed technology or service,
with any qualifying Sec. 7 request requiring further action within one
year.
8. The Commission proposes that a petitioner or applicant must
expressly request consideration under section 7 at the time of the
initial filing, and must include a detailed description of the proposed
``new technology or service'' and how it differs from existing
technologies or services. In addition, the Sec. 7 request must include
both qualitative and quantitative analyses showing how such new
technology or service would be in the public interest. The Commission
also proposes to codify a set of factors, described below, all of which
the petitioner or applicant must address with respect to its Sec. 7
request in the proceeding, and by which the Commission or the Bureau or
Office will evaluate whether the proposed technology or service is
``new'' and would serve the public interest.
9. First, because the timeline for a Commission public interest
finding regarding a Sec. 7 request is only one year from the filing
date of the petition or application that proposes a new technology or
service, the Commission proposes that the petition or application
include a separate Sec. 7 request that demonstrates that the new
technology or service proposed is both technically feasible and
available for commercial use/application, not merely theoretical or
speculative, so that the public benefits from the proposed new
technology or service can be evaluated in a meaningful way and can be
realized as soon as practicable.
10. Second, to evaluate the merits of a section 7 request, the
Commission proposes several categories of factors to identify whether
proposed technologies or services would be considered ``new.'' In
considering these factors, we note that determining what is ``new''
will not always be easy, particularly considering that technologies and
services in the communications industry are often evolutionary rather
than revolutionary. Petitions and applications that include a Sec. 7
request would be required to include a sufficient demonstration that
the proposed technology or service meets one or more of the specified
factors. For example, if the proposed technology or service has not
previously been authorized by the Commission, the Sec. 7 request in
the petition or application must explain how the function and
performance of the technology or service differs in essential or
fundamental respects from others that are already authorized. If the
proposed technology or service would make extraordinary or truly
significant enhancements to a previously-authorized technology or
service, the Sec. 7 request in the petition or application would need
to specifically quantify, qualify, or otherwise explain in sufficient
detail what is so new that it warrants consideration under Sec. 7.
11. Finally, the Commission proposes that the request for Sec. 7
consideration must show that the proposed new technology or service
would be in the public interest by, for example, promoting innovation
and investment, providing new competitive choices, providing new
technologies that enable accessibility to people with disabilities, or
meeting public demand for new or significantly improved services in
unserved and underserved areas.
12. In addition, the underlying petition or application that
includes the Sec. 7 request must comply with other legal or regulatory
requirements applicable to consideration of the various technical and
policy issues raised in the petition or application, including, as
applicable, any statutory requirements and the established licensing
rules and rights of existing licensees, regulatees, or users. Petitions
and applications, including the Sec. 7-related proposal, shall be
filed electronically using the Commission database that is appropriate
for the type of petition or application being filed, and a copy also
shall be sent electronically to the Chief(s) of the authorizing
Bureau(s) or Office(s) (e.g., Wireless Telecommunications, Wireline
Competition, International, and/or Media Bureaus) as well as the Chief
of the Office of Engineering and Technology, or to an appropriate
mailbox designated by them. The petitioner or applicant must make clear
in the filing that it is seeking consideration under section 7.
13. The proposed technological and service factors that we propose
to adopt are intended to single out for consideration and action those
proposals that involve significant breakthroughs or are truly
innovative, rather than those that are foreseeable or incremental
outgrowths of existing technologies or services. The Commission seeks
comment on these factors or other factors that would be appropriate
with effective implementation of Sec. 7 goals. What indicia should the
Commission use when evaluating what would constitute a ``new''
technology, as distinguished from an existing or evolving technology?
Similarly, the Commission requests comment on what would constitute a
``new'' service, as distinguished from existing services, and thus be
subject to Sec. 7 consideration.
14. Processing and Initial Assessment. The proposed rules would
provide for processing of a Sec. 7 request that is included as part of
a petition or application as follows. When a petition or application
that includes a Sec. 7 request is filed, both the authorizing
Bureau(s)/Office(s) and the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET)
will review the filing and issue a public notice on both the petition/
application and the Sec. 7 request. OET will assemble a team of
Commission staff with relevant expertise, including at least one
representative from any Bureau(s) or Office(s) with subject matter
expertise, to conduct an initial review to determine if the Sec. 7
request is complete and will be accepted for filing. The Commission
proposes that the filing date of the request for consideration under
Sec. 7, and hence the initiation of the review period under the Sec.
7 process, will be the date that the petition/application including the
Sec. 7 request is complete as filed, and thus can be accepted for
filing.
15. A public notice will be issued after the authorizing Bureau(s)/
Office(s) and the OET-led review team determines that the petition or
application, including the Sec. 7 request, is complete and ready for
processing. This
[[Page 14397]]
review would ensure that the petition or application that includes a
Sec. 7 claim complies both with the Sec. 7-related requirements
proposed and the other legal or regulatory requirements applicable to
the particular petition or application. This Public Notice will
identify the date the request was complete as filed, as well as
relevant deadlines for agency action.
16. 90-Day Determination. Next, the Commission proposes that the
OET-led team will determine whether the technology or service proposed
qualifies as a new technology or service for consideration under
section 7 within 90 days. To the extent appropriate or necessary, such
determination could take into consideration any comments, including any
oppositions, received in response to the public notice regarding the
Sec. 7 request. The OET-led team will notify the petitioner or
applicant in writing of its determination within 90 days after the
public notice is issued, or sooner where appropriate or practicable,
and its determination will be included in the public record of the
particular proceeding relating to the petition or application. This
determination would promote timely Commission or Bureau/Office action
to enable the provision of new technologies or services to the public
that could serve the public interest.
17. If the determination is positive--that is, that the request
qualifies for Sec. 7 treatment--we propose to commit the agency to
swift action, consistent with Sec. 7, to evaluate that technology or
service. Conversely, the Commission proposes not to make a negative
finding binding on the agency. Because this determination too will
necessarily be conducted prior to a more complete evaluation by the
Commission or the Bureau/Office of the various public interest benefits
associated either with the particular petition/application or the
proposed technology/service, the Commission or Bureau/Office, which
would be informed of the OET-led determination, may itself later
determine that a particular petition/application's proposed technology
or service initially deemed ineligible nonetheless may ultimately merit
Sec. 7 treatment. Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on what
the proper notification-and-elevation process should be before
releasing the 90-day determination, whether positive or negative. For
instance, should OET notify the offices of the Commissioners 48 hours
in advance, or some other length of time, of a pending 90-day
determination? Should two Commissioners or a majority of the Commission
be required to elevate the 90-day determination to a Commission-level
vote? If elevated, how can we ensure prompt voting? For example, would
five calendar days from elevation be sufficient time for Commissioners
to register a vote? If a quorum of commissioners registers a vote by
the deadline, should Commissioners not registering a vote be marked as
``not participating''? If less than a quorum of Commissioners registers
a vote, should the OET-led team release the 90-day determination on its
own?
18. The Commission also proposes not to entertain petitions for
reconsideration or applications for review of the 90-day determination.
First, the determination only guides agency process and would not in
itself constitute a final Commission or Bureau/Office order, decision,
report, or action with respect to the particular petition/application
or the public interest regarding use of the proposed technology/
service. Those public interest determinations fall squarely within the
purview of the Commission or the Bureau/Office, which has the authority
and responsibility to evaluate the various elements of the petition or
application as well as the use of the proposed technology or service
set forth in the petition or application, and to make associated public
interest findings. Thus, the OET-led team's evaluation of the Sec. 7
request would merely serve as a step in the overall process of
considering the proposed technology or service included in the
underlying petition or application and reaching the merits of the
public interest determinations. Subjecting the OET-led staff
determination to immediate and formal reconsideration could have the
perverse effect of slowing consideration of the more important core
issues that are before the Commission or Bureau/Office for
determination--namely, the merits and public interest associated with
the particular petition or application (and its constituent pieces),
and how best to ensure that the proposed technology or service (whether
new or not) can be used to serve the public. Such early formal review
could also result in scarce staff resources remaining focused on the
extent to which a technology or service is ``new,'' which can be a
complicated or involved question, thus diverting needed resources away
from the more important question of how best to address the underlying
issues. We also note that while a negative determination would not be
reviewable upon issuance, parties nonetheless would have the
opportunity to comment on the determination and ask that the Commission
or Bureau/Office reach a different conclusion when it evaluates the
full record and takes action with respect to the petition/application
or the proposed technology/service.
19. As required by section 7, any person or party (other than the
Commission) who opposes a new technology or service has the burden to
demonstrate that such a new technology or service is inconsistent with
the public interest. For example, it would not be sufficient for
someone to oppose a proposed technology or service merely because it
might cause economic harm to its own service or disrupt a particular
sector of the economy; the statute's stated goal to promote new
technologies and services in effect requires that opponents address the
potential public interest associated with the proposed technology or
service, not their own private interests.
20. Commission or Bureau/Office Review. For any petition/
application proposing a technology or service that receives a positive
90-day determination, the Commission or Bureau/Office will evaluate the
record once complete, and decide within a year of the filing date the
appropriate course of action with respect to the petition or
application.
21. Although Sec. 7 requires timely action by the Commission, it
does not create a presumption in favor of granting (in whole or part)
any particular petition or application that includes a proposal to
provide such new technology or service. Indeed, it grants the agency
plenary authority to dispose of the petition or application as it sees
fit, including by initiating its own proceeding to explore matters
further.
22. In cases where the 90-day determination is positive, to the
extent the Commission or Bureau/Office determines that the petition/
application proposes a technology or service that qualifies under Sec.
7, it would be obligated to take some concrete action within one year
that advances the development and use of new technologies or services
that are in the public interest. The Commission seeks comment on how to
apply these procedures in instances where outside parties are either
collaborating on or disputing the merits of a new technology or
service. Should the Commission take these types of considerations into
account when determining how to meet the one year deadline imposed by a
Sec. 7 finding? In contrast, if the Commission or the Bureau/Office
finds that a petition/application is not proposing use of new
technologies or services, and thus does not include any request that
qualifies for
[[Page 14398]]
consideration under Section 7, that petition/application would be
handled under the existing Commission processes that apply generally to
petitions and applications under the applicable rules.
23. Pending Petitions and Applications. The new rules and
procedures discussed above would apply with respect to all newly filed
petitions or applications that include a Sec. 7 request. For any
petition or application already pending at the time that the new rules
would become effective, the Commission proposes a variant of this
approach to accommodate any petitioner or applicant who also seeks
consideration under Sec. 7. In such cases, the petitioner or applicant
would supplement its filing with a specific Sec. 7 request that meets
the criteria outlined above, which would be followed by issuance of a
public notice focused on the Sec. 7-specific request, the 90-day
determination, and action within a year of the filing if merited.
24. Commission-initiated Proceedings. Section 7 provides that if
the Commission initiates its own proceeding for a new technology or
service, such proceeding must be completed within a year after it is
initiated. The Commission seek comments on how to ensure the Commission
complies with this statutory provision. For instance, what factors
should the Commission weigh in deciding whether to initiate a
proceeding on its own under Sec. 7? Additionally, when the Commission
itself does initiate a proceeding that it determines would trigger the
Sec. 7 timeline, should it identify the type of action(s) that it
plans to complete within a year that would promote such new technology
or service, so that it can in fact complete such action(s) within one
year, or, does the statutory provision require a final order? The
Commission also seeks comment on the various issues raised above and on
alternative approaches to implementing procedures to ensure compliance
with the Sec. 7 requirements.
Procedural Matters
25. Paperwork Reduction Analysis. This document contains proposed
new or modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the
general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment
on the information collection requirements contained in this document,
as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13.
In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seek
specific comment on how we might further reduce the information
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
26. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities of the
policies and rules proposed in the FNPRM. The IRFA is found in Appendix
B. The Commission requests written public comment on the IRFA. Comments
must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments
filed in response to the NPRM, and must have a separate and distinct
heading designating them as responses to the IRFA. The Commission's
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center,
will send a copy of this NPRM, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, in accordance with
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
27. Comment Filing Procedures. Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 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 the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121
(1998).
[ssquf] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the ECFS: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
[ssquf] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file
an original and one copy 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.
[ssquf] All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for
the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St. SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are
8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of
before entering the building.
[ssquf] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
[ssquf] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail
must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (TTY).
28. The proceeding that this Notice initiates shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy
of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral
presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a
different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda
summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of
electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto,
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available
for that proceeding, and must
[[Page 14399]]
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable
.pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves
with the Commission's ex parte rules.
Ordering Clauses
29. It is ordered that, pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1, 4(i), 4(j) and 7
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i),
154(j) and 157, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
30. It is ordered that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 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, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements and Telecommunications.
Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.
Proposed Rules
The Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part
1 as follows:
Part 1 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed
to be amended as follows:
0
1. The authority citation of part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 34-39, 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 157, 160,
201, 225, 227, 303, 309, 332, 1403, 1404, 1451, 1452 and 1455.
PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
0
2. Add Subpart U to read as follows:
Subpart U--Implementation of Section 7 of the Communications Act:
New Technologies and Services
Sec.
1.6000 Purpose and scope.
1.6001 Terms and definitions.
1.6002 Filing requirements for petitions and applications in which
consideration under section 7 is requested.
1.6003 Processing procedures for petitions or applications,
including a determination within 90 days.
1.6004 Evaluating new technologies and services proposed in
petitions or applications.
1.6005 Commission or Bureau/Office review.
1.6006 Commission-initiated proceedings for new technologies or
services.
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 157.
Sec. 1.6000 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to set out the procedures and
terms by which the Commission will implement the provisions of Sec. 7
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 157, to
encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public.
The procedures set forth in this subpart shall apply with respect to
any petition or application proposing use of a new technology or
service in which the petitioner or applicant requests consideration
under section 7.
(b) The rules and procedures set forth in this subpart do not
replace or substitute for the Commission's existing rules and
procedures for processing that apply with respect to the particular
petition or application submitted for consideration.
Sec. 1.6001 Terms and definitions.
(a) Terms used in this subpart have the following meanings:
Petition or application. Any request for Commission action, as
required under the Communications Act or the Commission's rules,
including, but not limited to, petitions for rulemaking, petitions for
waiver of Commission rules, and applications for authorization to
provide technologies or services to the public.
Service. An activity, method, or system that provides to the public
the means of meeting a public need including, but not limited to,
communications, industrial, or scientific uses authorized under the
Communications Act.
Technology. The application of scientific knowledge in engineering
to solve problems or invent useful tools for practical, industrial, or
scientific uses that rely on radio-frequency, wired, or other means
authorized under the Communications Act.
(b) For purposes of this subpart, the following dates shall apply:
(1) A petition or application that includes a proposal to permit
use of a new technology or service, and for which the petitioner or
applicant specifically requests consideration under Sec. 7, shall be
deemed filed as of the date when the petition or application, including
the request for consideration under section 7, is complete as filed;
such date shall be used for computing the beginning date pursuant to
Sec. 1.4(b) of this part.
(2) If the Commission initiates its own proceeding for a new
technology or service under Sec. 7, the beginning date for the action
taken is computed pursuant to Sec. 1.4(b) of this part.
Sec. 1.6002 Filing requirements for petitions and applications in
which consideration under section 7 is requested.
(a) If a petitioner or applicant seeks consideration under Sec. 7,
the petition or application shall include an express request for
consideration under Sec. 7 when the petition or application initially
is filed.
(b) The petition or application shall include:
(1) A detailed description of the proposed technology or service
associated with the petition or application, and how it differs from
existing technologies or services;
(2) A demonstration that the proposed technology or service
satisfies Sec. 1.6004(a) and one or more of the factors in Sec.
1.6004(b), and
(3) A showing that the use of the proposed technology or service
would be in the public interest as set forth in Sec. 1.6004(c).
(c) The petition or application shall comply with any legal or
procedural requirements for the type of request being filed, whether
required by statute, judicial precedent or Commission rules in this
chapter, or include a request for waiver of Commission requirements.
(d) The petition or application shall be filed electronically
through the Commission database that is appropriate for the type of
request being filed, and a copy of the petition or application shall be
sent electronically to the Chief(s) of the authorizing Bureau and/or
Office and the Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology (OET), or to
an appropriate mailbox designated by them.
(e) Section 7 consideration for pending petitions or applications.
If a petition or application is already pending before the Commission
at the time the rules in this subpart become effective, a petitioner or
applicant that seeks Sec. 7 consideration must submit an express
request for consideration under Sec. 7 that sets forth how it meets
the specific requirements set forth in this section.
Sec. 1.6003 Processing procedures for petitions or applications,
including a determination within 90 days.
(a) With regard to the specific request for consideration under
Sec. 7, the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) will assemble a
team of Commission staff with appropriate expertise, including at least
one representative from any Bureau(s) or Office(s) with subject matter
expertise, to review the request to determine if it is complete and can
be accepted for filing pursuant to Sec. 1.6001(b)(1). The team will
determine whether the request provides the
[[Page 14400]]
information required by Sec. Sec. 1.6002 and 1.6004 of this part and
complies with any other legal or procedural requirements necessary for
processing.
(b) When the underlying petition or application is complete and
accepted for filing, consistent with applicable rules and procedures,
and the request for consideration under Sec. 7 is complete and
accepted for filing pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, a public
notice seeking comment on the petition or application, including the
proposed technology or service that the petitioner or applicant asserts
as qualifying for Sec. 7 consideration, will be issued. This public
notice will identify the date that the petition or application and the
section 7 request is complete as filed, as well as any other relevant
deadlines for agency action.
(c) Any person or party (other than the Commission) who opposes a
new technology or service proposed by the petitioner or applicant shall
have the burden to demonstrate that such proposed technology or service
is inconsistent with the public interest.
(d) The OET-led team will make a determination within 90 days of
the issuance of the public notice as to whether the technology or
service proposed to be permitted qualifies as a new technology or
service for consideration under Sec. 7. This team will make this
determination by evaluation the Sec. 7 request pursuant to the factors
set forth in Sec. 1.6004 of this part.
(1) The OET-led team will notify the petitioner or applicant in
writing of its determination within these 90 days.
(2) The determination will be included in the public record in the
proceeding.
(3) The Commission and Bureau(s)/Office(s) with subject matter
expertise will be informed of this determination.
(4) This determination is not subject to review in petitions for
reconsideration or applications for review.
(e) To the extent that the OET-led team determines that the request
qualifies for Sec. 7 treatment, the agency shall be committed to
taking swift action to evaluate the technology or service. A
determination by the OET-led team that the request does not qualify for
Sec. 7 treatment is not binding on the agency, and the Commission or
the Bureau/Office may determine in its evaluation of the record that
the request merits Sec. 7 treatment.
Sec. 1.6004 Evaluating the new technologies or services proposed in
petitions or applications.
(a) The proposed technology or service shall be technically
feasible and commercially viable; the Commission will not consider a
proposed technology or service that is merely theoretical or
speculative. Petitioners or applicants shall include a showing of
technical feasibility and commercial viability for the proposed
technology or service by including, for example, the results of
experimental testing, technical analysis, or research.
(b) The proposed technology or service will be evaluated using one
or more of the following factors.
(1) The technology or service has not previously been authorized by
the Commission. This could include combining a previously-approved
technology in new ways to improve performance or functionalities. The
petition or application shall explain how the function and/or
performance of the proposed technology or service differs in essential
or fundamental respects from previously-approved technologies or
services.
(2) The proposed technology or service is similar to one previously
authorized but includes significant enhancements that result in new
functionalities or improved performance. The petition or application
shall explain how the proposed technology or service differs from
previously-approved technologies or services, and shall specifically
quantify or qualify the improvements in functionality or performance or
otherwise explain in sufficient detail what is so new that it warrants
consideration under Sec. 7.
(3) Other factors set forth by the petitioner or applicant, or
factors that the Commission deems appropriate for the specific
technology or service that is proposed.
(c) The petition or application shall include a showing that the
proposed new technology or service would be in the public interest by,
for example, explaining how the proposed technology or service would
promote innovation and investment, provide new competitive choices to
the public, provide new technologies that enable accessibility to
people with disabilities, or meet public demand for new or
significantly improved services in unserved and underserved areas.
Sec. 1.6005 Commission or Bureau/Office review.
(a) For any petition/application including a proposed technology or
service that receives a positive 90-day determination, the Commission
or Bureau/Office will evaluate the record once complete, and decide
within a year of the filing date the appropriate course of action with
respect to the petition or application.
(b) Although Sec. 7 requires timely action by the Commission, it
does not create a presumption in favor of granting (in whole or part)
any particular petition or application that includes a proposal to
provide such new technology or service. The agency retains plenary
authority to dispose of the petition or application and the proposed
technology or service as it sees fit, including by initiating its own
proceeding to explore matters further.
(c) In cases where the 90-day assessment is positive, to the extent
the Commission or Bureau/Office determines that the petition or
application proposes a technology or service that qualifies under Sec.
7, it would be obligated to take some concrete action within one year
that advances the development and use of new technologies or services
that are in the public interest.
(d) If the Commission or the Bureau/Office finds that a petition or
application is not proposing use of new technologies or services, and
thus does not include any request that qualifies for consideration
under section 7, that petition or application would be handled under
the existing Commission processes that apply generally to petitions and
applications under the applicable rules.
Sec. 1.6006 Commission-initiated proceedings for new technologies or
services.
If the Commission initiates its own proceeding for a new technology
or service, such proceeding must be completed within a year after it is
initiated.
[FR Doc. 2018-06741 Filed 4-3-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P