9856 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 42 / Thursday, March 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

with these equipment authorizations 

would not be changed by the proposals 

contained in this Notice. The changes to 

the regulations would permit operation 

of radar devices used in specific 

industrial applications in a higher 

frequency band (77–81 GHz). 

E. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rules 

None. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15 

Communications equipment, Radio, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Federal Communications Commission 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

Rule Changes 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 15 to read as follows: 

PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY 

DEVICES 

1. The authority citation for part 15 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302(a), 303, 304, 

307, 336 and 544a. 

2. Section 15.205 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 15.205 Restricted bands of operation. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(4) Any equipment operated under the 

provisions of § 15.253, § 15.255, 

§ 15.256 or § 15.257 of this part. 

* * * * * 

3. Section 15.256 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 15.256 Operation within the band 77–81 

GHz. 

(a) Operation within the 77–81 GHz 

band is limited to tank level probing 

radars (TLPR) under the provisions of 

this section. 

(1) TLPR transmitters must be 

operated only while mounted inside 

storage tanks or similar structures with 

antennas directed downward. Such 

storage structures shall be made of 

metal, concrete or other material with 

substantially similar attenuating 

characteristics. The tank shall be closed 

during the operation of the intentional 

radiator. Care shall be taken to ensure 

that gaskets, flanges, and other openings 

are sealed to eliminate signal leakage 

outside of the structure. 

(2) Storage tanks or structures housing 

a TLPR device shall be installed only in 

fixed locations and in commercial or 

industrial environments. 

(b) The emission levels shall not 

exceed the following: 

(1) Within the 77–81 GHz band, the 

equivalent isotropically radiated power 

(EIRP) of the TLPR transmitter without 

the storage tank shall not exceed +43 

dBm peak and +23 dBm average. 

(2) Emissions appearing outside of the 

77–81 GHz band shall be attenuated to 

at least 20 dB below the highest level of 

the fundamental emission. The ¥20 dB 

bandwidth of the device must be 

contained within the 77–81 GHz band 

under all conditions of operation 

including the effects from pulsing or 

other modulation techniques that may 

be employed as well as the frequency 

stability of the transmitter over the 

temperature range ¥20 to +50 degrees 

Celsius and an input voltage variation of 

85% to 115% of rated input voltage. 

(3) Emissions radiated in any 

direction from the TLPR while installed 

in the storage tank or enclosure shall not 

exceed the general limits in 15.209 of 

this part. 

(4) Compliance measurements for 

TLPR devices shall be made in 

accordance with the measurement 

guidelines specified by the Commission 

for TLPR devices operating in the 77–81 

GHz band. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4562 Filed 3–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 09–52; FCC 10–24] 

Policies To Promote Rural Radio 

Service and To Streamline Allotment 

and Assignment Procedures 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission adopted a Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), in 

which it announced that it was 

considering, without proposing specific 

rules, two issues urged by commenters 

in this proceeding. First, the 

Commission is considering whether, 

how, and under what circumstances 

federally-recognized Native American 

Tribes and Alaska Native Villages 

(Tribes) should receive a bidding credit 

in auctions for new radio stations. 

Second, the Commission is considering 

whether and how the Tribal Priority 

adopted in the First Report and Order 

(First R&O) in this proceeding might be 

claimed by Tribes that do not possess 

defined tribal lands. 

DATES: Comments may be filed on or 

before May 3, 2010 and reply comments 

may be filed on or before June 2, 2010. 

Written comments on the Paperwork 

Reduction Act proposed information 

collection requirements must be 

submitted by the public, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and 

other interested parties on or before May 

3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by MB Docket No. 09–52, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: ecfs@fcc.gov. Include the 

docket number in the subject line of the 

message. See the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document 

for detailed information on how to 

submit comments by e-mail. 

• Mail: 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 

418–0432. For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Doyle, Chief, Media Bureau, 

Audio Division, (202) 418–2700; 

Thomas Nessinger, Attorney-Advisor, 

Media Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 

418–2700. 

For additional information concerning 

the Paperwork Reduction Act 

information collection requirements 

contained in this document, contact 

Cathy Williams at 202–418–2918, or via 

the Internet at Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Further 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 

10–24, adopted January 28, 2010, and 

released February 3, 2010. 

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 Analysis 

The FNPRM contains potential 

information collection requirements 

subject to the PRA, Public Law 104–13. 

OMB, the general public, and other 

Federal agencies are invited to comment 

on the potential new and modified 

information collection requirements 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 42 / Thursday, March 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 9857 

contained in this FNPRM. If the 

information collection requirements are 

adopted, the Commission will submit 

the appropriate documents to OMB for 

review under Section 3507(d) of the 

PRA and OMB, the general public, and 

other Federal agencies will again be 

invited to comment on the new and 

modified information collection 

requirements adopted by the 

Commission. 

Public and agency comments on the 

potential proposed information 

collection requirements are due May 3, 

2010. Comments should address: (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. Pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), the FCC seeks specific 

comment on how it might ‘‘further 

reduce the information collection 

burden for small business concerns with 

fewer than 25 employees.’’ 

In addition to filing comments with 

the Secretary, a copy of any Paperwork 

Reduction Act comments on the 

information collection requirements 

contained herein should be submitted to 

Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1– 

C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20554, or via the Internet to 

Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov, and to 

Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), via the 

Internet to 

Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or by 

fax to 202–395–5167. 

Summary of Further Notice of Proposed 

Rule Making 

Some commenters noted that tribal 

applicants applying the Tribal Priority 

at the FM allotment rule making stage 

might still lose at auction to non-tribal 

bidders. It was suggested that a remedy 

for this problem would be to implement 

a bidding credit for qualified tribal 

applicants. 

Given the paucity of tribal-owned 

radio stations, it might be expected that 

the vast majority of tribal applicants for 

commercial facilities would qualify for 

new entrant bidding credits, negating 

the need for a special tribal bidding 

credit over and above the new entrant 

bidding credits. Moreover, the 

Commission has previously rejected the 

implementation of ‘‘finder’s’’ or 

‘‘pioneer’s’’ bidding credits for 

applicants that add allotments to the FM 

Table of Allotments. The Commission 

nevertheless believes it appropriate to 

consider various proposals for a special 

bidding credit for tribal applicants. 

While not proposing any one such 

proposal as a rule at this time, the 

Commission seeks comment to assist its 

consideration as to whether to offer 

such a new bidding credit, either in lieu 

of or in addition to the existing new 

entrant bidding credits. One option 

would be to establish a 35 percent 

bidding credit for tribal applicants, as 

long as they own no commercial 

facilities in the ‘‘same area’’ as the 

proposed new facility (as defined in 47 

CFR 73.5007(b)). Another would be the 

equivalent of a new entrant credit, 

rather than the Tribal Priority. The 

Commission would also consider 

whether to give tribal applicants the 

option to claim either the appropriate 25 

or 35 percent new entrant bidding credit 

or, as long as an applicant owns no 

other commercial stations in the same 

area, a 25 or 35 percent tribal bidding 

credit. Still another alternative would be 

to offer a choice of either the 

appropriate new entrant bidding credit 

or a lesser credit, perhaps 15 or 20 

percent, to tribal applicants who are not 

new entrants. In all of the above cases, 

the Commission would consider 

whether to limit the tribal bidding credit 

to allotments added using the Tribal 

Priority, and further, whether to limit 

the credit to the Tribe(s) or entity 

adding the allotment to the Table of 

Allotments. Should a qualifying bidder 

be able to employ a tribal bidding credit 

in addition to a new entrant bidding 

credit (at least for qualifying tribal 

allotments) rather than in lieu of the 

new entrant credit? Additionally, 

applicants using new entrant bidding 

credits are subject to the unjust 

enrichment provisions of our Rules, 

which require that all or a portion of the 

bidding credit be reimbursed if the 

authorization is assigned or transferred 

within five years of issuance to a party 

not qualifying for the credit. What 

impact would a tribal bidding credit 

have on the unjust enrichment rules, 

and what adjustments (if any) should 

the Commission make to those rules to 

accommodate a tribal bidding credit? 

The Commission seeks comment on 

these proposals, or any other proposals 

forwarded by commenters for a 

potential tribal bidding credit. 

The Tribal Priority as adopted in the 

First R&O is by its terms limited to 

Tribes possessing tribal lands that can 

be served. Commenters to the Rural 

NPRM pointed out that many Tribes do 

not have their own reservations or 

defined tribal lands. It was urged that 

the Commission seek comment on ways 

in which ‘‘landless’’ Tribes may 

nonetheless avail themselves of the 

Tribal Priority. 

The Tribal Priority proposed in the 

Rural NPRM was principally designed 

to enable Tribes to aid the development, 

and perpetuate the language and culture 

of their members, not merely to give 

Tribes a blanket priority over other 

applicants for facilities that may not 

provide service targeted at Tribal 

citizens or communities. Two 

commenters stated that other federal 

agencies use different concepts, such as 

‘‘service areas,’’ rather than strict 

definitions of tribal lands. It was further 

suggested that provision could be made 

for tribal applicants to show that the 

proposed principal community contour 

serves the functional equivalent of tribal 

lands, using factors such as Native 

American population density, cultural 

links between the community of license 

and the Tribe or Tribes, or other factors. 

The Commission therefore considers, 

without proposing a specific rule, 

whether and how Tribes without tribal 

lands as defined in the First R&O and 

in the Rural NPRM can qualify for the 

Tribal Priority. For example, the 

Commission considers whether a 

threshold tribal population, or tribal 

population density, could be taken into 

account in determining whether a tribal 

applicant meets the tribal coverage and 

community of license criteria of the 

Tribal Priority. Another possibility 

would be to consider whether historical 

or contemporary cultural links could be 

taken into account in making the tribal 

coverage and community 

determinations. Should the fact that a 

currently landless Tribe or Tribes 

previously occupied the coverage area 

or proposed community of license be 

taken into account? Are there other 

factors that should be considered? The 

Commission invites comment on these 

issues, and seek suggestions as to 

whether and how it might institute such 

a procedure. 

Comments and Reply Comments. 

Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s Rules (47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419), interested parties must file 

comments on or before May 3, 2010, and 

must file reply comments on or before 

June 2, 2010. Comments may be filed 

using: (1) The Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS); (2) the 

Federal Government’s eRulemaking 

Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. 

Comments may be filed electronically 

using the Internet by accessing the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
9858 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 42 / Thursday, March 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cbg/ecfs, or 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Filers should 

follow the instructions provided on the 

Web sites for submitting comments. For 

ECFS filers, if multiple docket or 

rulemaking numbers appear in the 

caption of this proceeding, filers must 

transmit one electronic copy of the 

comments for each docket or 

rulemaking number referenced in the 

caption. In completing the transmittal 

screen, filers should include their full 

name, U.S. Postal Service mailing 

address, and the applicable docket or 

rulemaking number. Parties may also 

submit an electronic comment by 

Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions 

for e-mail comments, commenters 

should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, 

and should include the following words 

in the body of the message, ‘‘get form.’’ 

A sample form and directions will be 

sent in response. 

Parties who choose to file by paper 

must file an original and four copies of 

each filing. If more than one docket or 

rulemaking number appears in the 

caption of this proceeding, filers must 

submit two additional copies for each 

additional docket or rulemaking 

number. Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service (although 

the Commission continues to experience 

delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service 

mail). All filings must be addressed to 

the Commission’s Secretary, Office of 

the Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. The Commission’s 

contractor will receive hand-delivered 

or messenger-delivered paper filings for 

the Commission’s Secretary at 236 

Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, 

Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours 

at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All 

hand deliveries must be held together 

with rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes must be disposed of before 

entering the building. Commercial 

overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal 

Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) 

must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 

Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. 

Postal Service first-class mail, Express 

Mail, and Priority Mail should be 

addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

Contact the FCC to request materials 

in accessible formats (Braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format, etc.) 

by e-mail at FCC504@fcc.gov, or call the 

Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0531 (voice), 202– 

418–7365 (TTY). 

The full text of the Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, Room CY–A257, 

445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. The complete text may be 

purchased from the Commission’s copy 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 

445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554. The full text 

may also be downloaded at: http:// 

hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ 

attachmatch/FCC-09-30.pdf. Alternative 

formats are available to persons with 

disabilities by contacting Martha Contee 

at (202) 418–0260 or TTY (202) 418– 

2555. 

Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding will 

be treated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ 

proceeding subject to the ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ requirements under 

§ 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s Rules 

(47 CFR 1.1206(b)). Ex parte 

presentations are permissible if 

disclosed in accordance with 

Commission Rules, except during the 

Sunshine Agenda period when 

presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are 

generally prohibited. Persons making 

oral ex parte presentations are reminded 

that a memorandum summarizing a 

presentation must contain a summary of 

the substance of the presentation and 

not merely a listing of the subjects 

discussed. More than a one- or twosentence description of the views and 

arguments presented is generally 

required. Additional rules pertaining to 

oral and written presentations are set 

forth in § 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s 

Rules. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 

as amended (RFA), requires that a 

regulatory flexibility analysis be 

prepared for notice and comment rule 

making proceedings, unless the agency 

certifies that ‘‘the rule will not, if 

promulgated, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities.’’ The RFA 

generally defines the term ‘‘small entity’’ 

as having the same meaning as the terms 

‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ 

and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 

In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ 

has the same meaning as the term ‘‘small 

business concern’’ under the Small 

Business Act. A ‘‘small business 

concern’’ is one which: (1) Is 

independently owned and operated; (2) 

is not dominant in its field of operation; 

and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 

established by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA). 

As required by the RFA (5 U.S.C. 

603), the Commission has prepared this 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) of the possible significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities by the policies 

and rules proposed in the FNPRM. 

Written public comments are requested 

on this IRFA. Comments must be 

identified as responses to the IRFA and 

must be filed by the deadlines for 

comments on the FNPRM provided in 

paragraph 75 of the FNPRM. The 

Commission will send a copy of this 

entire FNPRM, including this IRFA, to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA). 

In addition, the FNPRM and the IRFA 

(or summaries thereof) will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

Need For, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rules. This further rulemaking 

proceeding is initiated to obtain 

comments concerning commenters’ 

request that the Commission consider 

providing a bidding credit to Native 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska 

Native Villages (Tribes) and entities 

owned by Tribes, and also to obtain 

comments concerning a commenter’s 

proposal to provide a Tribal Priority, as 

adopted in the First R&O in this 

proceeding, to Tribes that do not 

possess their own tribal lands. The 

Commission has put out for 

consideration several proposals for a 

potential tribal bidding credit: to grant 

Tribes the maximum permissible 35 

percent bidding credit provided they do 

not own any other facility in the ‘‘same 

area’’ as the proposed new facility; to 

give Tribes the option to claim either 

the appropriate 25 or 35 percent new 

entrant bidding credit or, as long as the 

applicant owns no stations in the same 

area as the proposed new station, a 25 

or 35 percent tribal bidding credit; or to 

offer Tribes a choice of either the 

appropriate new entrant bidding credit 

or a lesser credit, perhaps 15 or 20 

percent, to tribal applicants who are not 

new entrants. In all of the above cases, 

the Commission also considers whether 

to limit the tribal bidding credit, in FM 

auctions, to allotments added using the 

Tribal Priority, and further, whether to 

limit the credit to the Tribe(s) or entity 

adding the allotment to the Table of 

Allotments. In other words, should the 

bidding credit be available to otherwise 

qualifying applicants that did not 

participate in the Tribal allotment 

reservation process? The Commission 

also considers herein whether a tribal 

bidding credit should be available in 

addition to a new entrant bidding credit 

(at least for qualifying tribal FM 

allotments) or in lieu of the new entrant 

bidding credit. The Commission 

believes these proposals, if adopted, 

will provide opportunities for Tribes 

and tribal entities proposing new FM 

allotments better to compete at auction 

for those allotments. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 42 / Thursday, March 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 9859 

The Commission is also considering, 

without proposing a specific rule, 

whether and how Tribes without tribal 

lands can qualify for the Tribal Priority. 

The proposals offered for consideration 

by commenters are (1) Whether an 

applicant or proponent is deemed to 

provide tribal area coverage if it covers 

a certain threshold tribal population or 

population density, (2) whether 

historical or contemporary cultural links 

between a Tribe and land or population 

covered should be taken into account in 

making the tribal coverage and 

community of license determinations, 

and (3) whether the fact that a currently 

landless Tribe or Tribes previously 

occupied the coverage area or proposed 

community of license should be taken 

into account. The Commission 

considers these proposals, and seeks 

comment and suggestions as to other 

ways to extend the benefits of the Tribal 

Priority to those Tribes that do not have 

reservations or other tribal lands, 

allowing such ‘‘landless’’ Tribes to 

acquire radio stations to achieve the 

goals of aiding tribal development, and 

perpetuating tribal language and 

culture. 

Legal Basis. The authority for this 

proposed rulemaking is contained in 

Sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, 307, and 309(j) 

of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 

U.S.C 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307, and 

309(j). 

Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities to Which the 

Proposed Rules Will Apply. The RFA 

directs the Commission to provide a 

description of and, where feasible, an 

estimate of the number of small entities 

that will be affected by the proposed 

rules. The RFA generally defines the 

term ‘‘small entity’’ as encompassing the 

terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small 

organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental 

entity.’’ In addition, the term ‘‘small 

Business’’ has the same meaning as the 

term ‘‘small business concern’’ under the 

Small Business Act. A small business 

concern is one which: (1) Is 

independently owned and operated; (2) 

is not dominant in its field of operation; 

and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 

established by the SBA. 

Radio Stations. The proposed rules 

and policies potentially will apply to all 

AM and FM radio broadcasting 

applicants, and proponents for new FM 

allotments, who qualify for the Tribal 

Priority adopted in the First R&O in this 

proceeding. The ‘‘Radio Stations’’ 

Economic Census category ‘‘comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in 

broadcasting aural programs by radio to 

the public. Programming may originate 

in their own studio, from an affiliated 

network, or from external sources. The 

SBA has established a small business 

size standard for this category, which is: 

such firms having $7 million or less in 

annual receipts. According to BIA 

Advisory Services, LLC, MEDIA Access 

Pro Database on March 17, 2009, 10,884 

(95%) of 11,404 commercial radio 

stations have revenue of $6 million or 

less. Therefore, the majority of such 

entities are small entities. We note, 

however, that in assessing whether a 

business concern qualifies as small 

under the above size standard, business 

affiliations must be included. In 

addition, to be determined to be a ‘‘small 

business,’’ the entity may not be 

dominant in its field of operation. We 

note that it is difficult at times to assess 

these criteria in the context of media 

entities, and our estimate of small 

businesses may therefore be overinclusive. 

Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance 

Requirements. The proposed rule and 

procedural changes may, in some cases, 

impose different reporting requirements 

on existing and potential radio licensees 

and permittees, insofar as they would 

require or allow certain applicants to 

file new technical and population 

coverage information on or after filing 

the short form application (FCC 175) or 

in the noncommercial educational long 

form application (FCC 340). However, 

the information to be filed is already 

familiar to broadcasters, and the 

information requested to claim the 

Tribal Priority is similar to current 

Section 307(b) showings, so any 

additional burdens would be minimal. 

To the extent that other applicants 

would be disadvantaged by Tribes 

qualifying for the Tribal Priority, the 

Commission believes that such burdens 

would be offset by the fact that the 

Tribal Priority is designed to redress 

inequities in the number of tribal radio 

licensees, compared to the population of 

tribal citizens in the United States and 

the fact that some of these citizens were 

deprived of their original tribal lands. 

The Tribal Priority, then, not only helps 

the Commission to meet its goals of 

ownership and program diversity, but 

also furthers the federal government’s 

obligations toward Tribes to assist them 

in promulgating tribal languages and 

cultures, and to support tribal selfgovernment. 

Steps Taken to Minimize Significant 

Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered. The 

RFA requires an agency to describe any 

significant alternatives that it has 

considered in reaching its proposed 

approach, which may include the 

following four alternatives (among 

others): (1) The establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance or reporting requirements 

under the rule for small entities; (3) the 

use of performance, rather than design, 

standards; and (4) an exemption from 

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, 

for small entities. In the FNPRM, the 

Commission seeks to provide additional 

opportunities for participation by Tribes 

in broadcast auctions, especially FM 

auctions, and to open up the Tribal 

Priority to those Tribes who do not 

currently have tribal lands, and who 

therefore cannot qualify under the 

Tribal Priority’s tribal coverage 

criterion. The Commission is open to 

consideration of alternatives to the 

proposals under consideration, as set 

forth herein, including but not limited 

to alternatives that will minimize the 

burden on broadcasters, most of whom 

are small businesses. There may be 

unique circumstances these entities may 

face, and we will consider appropriate 

action for small broadcasters when 

preparing a Report and Order in this 

matter. 

Federal Rules Which Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With, the 

Commission’s Proposals. None. 

This document is available in 

alternative formats (computer diskette, 

large print, audio record, and Braille). 

Persons with disabilities who need 

documents in these formats may contact 

Brian Millin at (202) 418–7426 (voice), 

(202) 418–7365 (TTY), or via e-mail at 

Brian.Millin@fcc.gov. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3492 Filed 3–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 10–307; MB Docket No. 10–49; RM– 

11593] 

Television Broadcasting Services; 

Beaumont, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission has before it 

a petition for rulemaking filed by 

Freedom Broadcasting of Texas 

(‘‘Freedom Broadcasting’’), the licensee 

of KFDM(TV), channel 21, Beaumont, 

Texas. Freedom Broadcasting requests 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS