61316 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: January 12, 2004. 

S.A. Kenney, 

Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy 

Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty 

and Maritime Law).

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Office of the Federal Register 

October 13, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04–23212 Filed 10–15–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy 

32 CFR Part 706 

Certifications and Exemptions Under 

the International Regulations for 

Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy 

is amending its certifications and 

exemptions under the International 

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at 

Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that 

the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General of the Navy (Admiralty and 

Maritime Law) has determined that USS 

PAUL HAMILTON (DDG 60) is a vessel 

of the Navy which, due to its special 

construction and purpose, cannot fully 

comply with certain provisions of the 72 

COLREGS without interfering with its 

special function as a naval ship. The 

intended effect of this rule is to warn 

mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS 

apply.

DATES: January 12, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Commander S.A. Kenney, JAGC, U.S. 

Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), 

Office of the Judge Advocate General, 

Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson 

Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy 

Yard, DC 20374–5066, Telephone 

number: (202) 685–5040.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 

1605, the Department of the Navy 

amends 32 CFR part 706. This 

amendment provides notice that the 

Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General of the Navy (Admiralty and 

Maritime Law), under authority 

delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, 

has certified that USS PAUL 

HAMILTON (DDG 60) is a vessel of the 

Navy which, due to its special 

construction and purpose, cannot fully 

comply with the following specific 

provision of 72 COLREGS without 

interfering with its special function as a 

naval ship: Annex I paragraph 3(a) 

pertaining to the location of the forward 

masthead light in the forward quarter of 

the vessel, and the horizontal distance 

between the forward and after masthead 

lights. The Deputy Assistant Judge 

Advocate General of the Navy 

(Admiralty and Maritime Law) has also 

certified that the lights involved are 

located in closest possible compliance 

with the applicable 72 COLREGS 

requirements. This amendment further 

provides notice that the Deputy 

Assistant Judge Advocate General 

(Admiralty and Maritime Law), has 

amended that certification to reflect that 

certain masthead lights on USS PAUL 

HAMILTON (DDG 60), previously 

certified as not in compliance with 72 

COLREGS, now comply with the 

applicable 72 COLREGS requirements, 

to wit: the arc of visibility of the forward 

masthead light is no longer obstructed, 

as required by Rule 21(a).

Moreover, it has been determined, in 

accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 

701, that publication of this amendment 

for public comment prior to adoption is 

impracticable, unnecessary, and 

contrary to public interest since it is 

based on technical findings that the 

placement of lights on this vessel in a 

manner differently from that prescribed 

herein will adversely affect the vessel’s 

ability to perform its military functions.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 706 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), and 

Vessels.

■ Accordingly, 32 CFR Part 706 is 

amended as follows:

PART 706—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

Part 706 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1605.

§ 706.2 [Amended]

■ 2. Table Four, Paragraph 16 of § 706.2 

is amended by deleting the entry for USS 

PAUL HAMILTON.

■ 4. Table Five of § 706.2 is amended by 

revising the entry for USS PAUL 

HAMILTON to read as follows:

§ 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of 

the Navy under Executive Order 11964 and 

33 U.S.C. 1605.

* * * * *

Vessel Number 

Masthead 

lights not over 

all other lights 

and obstructions. annex I, 

sec. 2(f) 

Forward masthead light not 

in forward 

quarter of 

ship. annex I, 

sec. 3(a) 

After masthead light less 

than 1⁄2 ship’s 

length aft of 

forward masthead light. 

annex I, sec. 

3(a) 

Percentage 

horizontal separation attained 

* * * * * * * 

USS PAUL HAMILTON ..................................................... DDG 60 ............ ........................ X X 21.2 

* * * * * * * 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61317

Dated: January 12, 2004. 

S.A. Kenney, 

Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy 

Assistant Judge Advocate, General (Admiralty 

and Maritime Law).

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Office of the Federal Register 

October 13, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04–23211 Filed 10–15–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 1

[WT Docket No. 99–266; FCC 04–202] 

Extending Wireless 

Telecommunications Services to Tribal 

Lands

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Final rules.

SUMMARY: In this rule, the Commission 

modifies limited aspects of the rules 

previously adopted in this proceeding to 

provide incentives for wireless 

telecommunications carriers to serve 

individuals living on tribal lands. 

Specifically, the Commission raises the 

wireline telephone penetration rate at 

which tribal lands are eligible for a 

bidding credit from 70 percent or less, 

to 85 percent or less. The Commission 

also increases the amount of the bidding 

credit available to carriers that pledge to 

deploy on and serve qualifying tribal 

lands.

DATES: Effective December 17, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Renee Crittendon or Michael Connelly, 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 

at (202) 418–0620.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Federal 

Communications Commission’s Third 

Report and Order, FCC 04–202, adopted 

August 18, 2004, and released 

September 2, 2004. The full text of the 

Third Report and Order is available for 

public inspection during regular 

business hours at the FCC Reference 

Information Center, 445 12th St., SW., 

Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

The complete text may be purchased 

from the Commission’s duplicating 

contractor: Best Copy & Printing, Inc., 

445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone 800–

378–3160, facsimile 202–488–5563, or 

via e-mail at www.fcc@bcpiweb.com. 

Synopsis of Report and Order 

I. Background 

1. In June 2000, the Commission 

issued a First Report and Order, 65 FR 

47349, August 2, 2000 (First R&O) 

which established the tribal lands 

bidding credit program and limited 

availability of the credit to federally 

recognized tribal areas with telephone 

penetration rates equal to or less than 70 

percent, concluding that the bidding 

credits would assist tribal communities 

with the greatest need for access to 

telecommunications service. The 

Commission’s Second Report and Order

at 68 FR 23417, May 2, 2003, modified 

and clarified aspects of the bidding 

credit procedures, including: extending 

the deadline for obtaining the 

certifications from the applicable tribal 

governments from 90 to 180 days; 

clarifying the obligations of an assignee 

that has received the license from a 

licensee awarded a tribal lands bidding 

credit; requiring licensees to file an 

attachment along with their notification 

of construction; stating that it is 

providing coverage to 75 percent of the 

population of the tribal area for which 

the credit was awarded; and codifying 

penalties for failure to comply with 

build-out requirements, and failure to 

timely repay the bidding credit. 

2. In the Second Further Notice, 18 

FCC Rcd 4775, March 14, 2003, the 

Commission sought comment on four 

discrete issues. First, the Commission 

asked whether it should reconsider or 

moderate the buildout obligations 

imposed on carriers in light of the lack 

of participation in the bidding credit 

program. Next, the Commission asked 

for comments on whether and how the 

bidding credit limit and formula might 

be modified to provide greater incentive 

for carriers to deploy facilities on tribal 

lands. Then, the Commission sought 

comment on whether it should adjust 

the bidding credit formula to 

incorporate data from the 2000 Census 

figures rather than the 1990 figures in 

calculating tribal penetration for 

purposes of determining eligibility for 

the credit. Finally, the Commission 

sought comment on allowing carriers 

who obtain tribal lands bidding credits, 

to obtain additional credit for extending 

their coverage to immediately adjacent 

non-tribal areas that also have low 

penetration rates.

II. Discussion 

A. Modifying the Construction 

Requirements of the Tribal Lands 

Bidding Credit 

3. In the Second Further Notice, the 

Commission sought comment on 

modifying the requirement that, within 

three years of grant of a license, a carrier 

must cover 75 percent of the tribal area 

for which the bidding credit was 

awarded. The Commission’s underlying 

objective in applying the more stringent 

construction requirement was to 

encourage winning bidders that are 

committed to providing 

telecommunications services in Indian 

Country, and that will deploy those 

services rapidly. The Commission 

continues to believe that the heightened 

requirement serves those dual purposes, 

and believes that relaxing these 

requirements is not necessary to further 

the goals of the bidding credit program. 

The Commission also notes that should 

a carrier be unable to fulfill its 

construction requirement at the end of 

three years, it may seek a waiver from 

the relevant Commission rule. 

Therefore, the Commission determined 

not to modify the construction 

requirement. Rather, it strongly 

encourages parties to seek waivers of 

specific rules or file other requests for 

regulatory relief in those instances 

where greater flexibility than the rules 

allow would facilitate the provision of 

service to tribal lands. Also, because the 

Commission recognizes the unique 

sovereign status of Indian tribes, the 

trust relationship between the federal 

government and Indian tribes, and the 

Commission’s ongoing federal 

obligation to guarantee the right of 

Indian tribes to self-government, the 

Commission declined to adopt a 

suggestion to allow applicants, as 

opposed to tribal governments, to certify 

compliance with certain baseline 

eligibility requirements. 

B. Increasing the Bidding Credit Limit 

4. In the Second Further Notice, the 

Commission asked commenters whether 

the current credit amounts were 

adequate or whether the bidding credit 

limit, as presently structured, was 

insufficient for applicants to recover 

costs for building on tribal lands. 

Determining that an increase in the 

bidding credit limit is warranted in 

order to further mitigate the economic 

risk associated with provision of 

service, the Commission adopted the 

following formula for calculating the 

credit amount. A winning bidder may 

receive a $500,000 credit for up to the 

first 200 square miles (518 square 

kilometers) of qualifying tribal land 

within its license area. In instances 

where qualifying tribal lands within a 

license area exceed 200 square miles 

(518 kilometers), a winning bidder may 

receive an additional $2500 per square 

mile (2.59 square kilometers), or 

$500,000 for each additional 200 square