48744 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

cc: Kristy Carroll, Esq., Universal Service 

Administrative Company (via e-mail) 

Dayle A. Elieson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, 

United States Department of Justice (via 

mail). 

[FR Doc. E9–22968 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

[MB Docket No. 08–214; DA 09–1855] 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. v. Time 

Warner Cable Inc., et al. 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This document clarifies that 

parties are entitled to file exceptions to 

the recommended decision of the 

Administrative Law Judge in the 

proceedings listed in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on this 

proceeding, contact David Konczal, 

David.Konczal@fcc.gov, of the Media 

Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418– 

2120. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Order, DA 09–1855, 

adopted and released on August 31, 

2009. The full text of this document is 

available for public inspection and 

copying during regular business hours 

in the FCC Reference Center, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street, SW., CY–A257, Washington, DC 

20554. This document will also be 

available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/ 

cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available 

electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/ 

or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554. To request this 

document in accessible formats 

(computer diskettes, large print, audio 

recording, and Braille), send an e-mail 

to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Synopsis of the Order 

1. On October 10, 2008, the Media 

Bureau issued a Memorandum Opinion 

and Hearing Designation Order 

(‘‘HDO’’) referring the above-captioned 

matters to an Administrative Law Judge 

for recommended decisions. 73 FR 

65312, November 3, 2008. In the HDO, 

the Media Bureau directed an ALJ to 

resolve the factual disputes with respect 

to the claims in each of the abovecaptioned cases and to ‘‘return a 

recommended decision and a 

recommended remedy, if necessary, to 

the Commission * * *.’’ See id. at 

65327–28. The HDO also stated that, 

upon receipt of the ALJ’s recommended 

decision and remedy, the Commission 

would make the requisite legal 

determinations and decide upon 

appropriate remedies, if necessary. See 

id. The HDO failed to specify whether 

parties are entitled to file exceptions to 

the ALJ’s recommended decision. We 

issue this Order, sua sponte, to remove 

uncertainty surrounding this issue and 

clarify that parties are entitled to file 

exceptions to the ALJ’s recommended 

decision. We direct parties that choose 

to file exceptions to comply with the 

procedures and deadlines set forth in 

Sections 1.276 and 1.277 of the 

Commission’s rules. Sections 1.276 and 

1.277 of the Commission’s rules pertain 

to appeal and review of initial 

decisions. See 47 CFR 1.276, 1.277. As 

applied here, these rules allow parties to 

file exceptions to or briefs in support of 

the ALJ’s recommended decision within 

30 days after public release of the full 

text of the recommended decision. See 

47 CFR 1.276(a). These rules also 

provide that parties may file reply briefs 

within ten days after the time for filing 

exceptions has expired. See 47 CFR 

1.277(c). 

2. Accordingly, It is ordered, pursuant 

to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 409(b) of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), and 

409(b), and Section 1.2 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.2, that 

parties in the below-captioned matters 

may file exceptions to the ALJ’s 

recommended decision pursuant to the 

procedures set forth herein. 

3. It is further ordered that all parties 

to the below-captioned proceedings will 

be served with a copy of this Order by 

e-mail and by certified mail, return 

receipt requested. 

4. It is further ordered that a copy of 

this Order, or a summary thereof, Shall 

Be Published in the Federal Register. 

5. This action is taken pursuant to 

delegated authority pursuant to Section 

0.283 of the Commission’s rules. See 47 

CFR 0.283. 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a 

WealthTV, Complainant v. Time 

Warner Cable Inc., Defendant; File 

No. CSR–7709–P 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a 

WealthTV, Complainant v. Bright 

House Networks, LLC, Defendant; File 

No. CSR–7822–P 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a 

WealthTV, Complainant v. Cox 

Communications, Inc., Defendant; 

File No. CSR–7829–P 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a 

WealthTV, Complainant v. Comcast 

Corporation, Defendant; File No. 

CSR–7907–P 

TCR Sports Broadcasting Holding, 

L.L.P., d/b/a Mid-Atlantic Sports 

Network, Complainant v. Comcast 

Corporation, Defendant; File No. 

CSR–8001–P 

Federal Communications Commission. 

William T. Lake, 

Chief, Media Bureau. 

[FR Doc. E9–22828 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[OMB Control No. 9000–0029] 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Extraordinary Contractual Action 

Requests 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DOD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Notice of request for comments 

regarding an extension to an existing 

OMB clearance (9000–0029). 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 

Secretariat will be submitting to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) a request to review and approve 

an extension of a currently approved 

information collection requirement 

concerning extraordinary contractual 

action requests. A request for public 

comments was published at 74 FR 

32165, July 7, 2009. No comments were 

received. 

Public comments are particularly 

invited on: Whether this collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of functions of the FAR, 

and whether it will have practical 

utility; whether our estimate of the 

public burden of this collection of 

information is accurate, and based on 

valid assumptions and methodology; 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES