Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 87 / Thursday, May 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules 25895

for such treatment and maintenance of

records on such drugs.

These statutory mandates have been

reflected in treatment regulations that

have been enforced by the Food and

Drug Administration (FDA) since 1972.

EDA has approved over 900 ‘‘narcotic

treatment programs’’ under these

regulations. Up until 1993, methadone

was the only narcotic treatment

medication approved for use under

these regulations. In 1993, the

regulations were revised to add

regulatory standards for the use of levoalpha-acetyl-methadol (LAAM),

following review and approval of a New

Drug Application (NDA) for this use by

FDA.

FDA has received and is reviewing

NDAs for two new narcotic treatment

medications, buprenorphine and

buprenorphine/naloxone

(buprenorphine/nx). If approved, both

products must be the subject of

treatment standards.

The Secretary recognizes that partial

or mixed agonist medications, are

different than full agonists, such as

methadone and LAAM. The Secretary

has, therefore, determined that these

differences warrant a different treatment

standard model:

The Secretary notes that there are new

medications under development for the

treatment of opioid addiction. While still

under investigation and review, it is

conceivable that these new medications will

present safety and effectiveness profiles that

differ from the existing approved treatment

medications, methadone and LAAM. A new

medication, for example, could rely on weak

or partial agonist properties or on mixed

agonist-antagonist properties, with

pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic

properties that would minimize the risk of

deliberate abuse through injection and, in

turn, would minimize the overall risk of

diversion. As such, it may be appropriate to

tailor the Federal opioid treatment standards

to the specific characteristics of these future

medications. (See Federal Register, July 22,

1999, 64 FR 39810.)

Because of their special

characteristics, partial agonist

medications should be the subject of

specific treatment standards. Indeed,

partial agonist medications’

pharmacological properties and safety

profiles warrant a new paradigm in

narcotic addiction treatment, officebased treatment. Therefore, the

Department of Health and Human

Services is announcing its intent to

develop and issue a proposed rule that

will address the use of partial agonist

treatment medications in the officebased treatment of narcotic addiction.

II. Office-Based Treatment of Narcotic

Addiction

The Department is preparing a

proposed rule for publication in the

near future that will address the use of

approved narcotic partial agonist

treatment drugs controlled in Schedules

III–V, in office-based settings. The

proposed rule will include standards

and procedures for determining the

training and experience necessary to

safely and effectively treat opiate

addicts with partial agonist treatment

medications in an office-based setting.

This may include limits on the number

of patients that may be treated by any

one office-based physician. In addition,

the proposal will include standards that

relate to medical and psychosocial

services, including counseling, that

should be available to patients that are

determined to need them. The proposed

rule will include standards respecting

the quantities of medications that may

be prescribed, dispensed or

administered to patients for

unsupervised use.

In anticipation of the availability of

partial agonist treatment medications, a

Subcommittee on Buprenorphine was

formed as part of SAMHSA’s Center for

Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT)

National Advisory Council. The

Subcommittee considered the available

research base on buprenorphine, officebased settings, and Federal oversight

during two public meetings. The full

CSAT National Advisory Council, after

deliberation, adopted the

Subcommittee’s findings and

recommendations which were

subsequently conveyed to CSAT by the

Council on June 11, 1999, in the form

of a comprehensive report. The report

may be obtained by notifying the CSAT

contact listed above. The report is also

available at the SAMHSA website

(www.samhsa.gov).

SAMHSA believes that a key feature

of office-based treatment will be the

ability of the office-based physician to

prescribe partial agonist treatment

medications to patients in treatment.

Without the ability to prescribe, officebased physicians would have to store

and dispense medications directly to

patients. These practices could be

expensive and impractical for the

patient and office-based physician.

Current regulations enforced by the

Drug Enforcement Administration (21

CFR 1306.07(a)) prohibit prescriptions

for narcotics drugs used in the treatment

of narcotic addiction. However, DEA is

preparing a separate proposed rule to

rescind this prohibition as it pertains to

narcotic treatment drugs controlled in

Schedules III–V.

III. References

1. Using Buprenorphine for OfficeBased Treatment of Opiate Addiction,

Recommendations to the Center for

Substance Abuse Treatment.

Dated: December 29, 1999.

Nelba Chavez,

Administrator, Substance Abuse and Mental

Health Services Administration.

Dated: March 30, 1999.

Donna E. Shalala,

Secretary, Health and Human Services.

[FR Doc. 00–10969 Filed 5–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4162–20–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 00–44; FCC 00–93]

Extension of the Filing Requirement

for Children’s Television Programming

Reports (FCC Form 398)

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The document proposes to

amend the FCC’s rules to continue

indefinitely the requirement that

commercial broadcast television

licensees file with the Commission, on

an annual basis, their quarterly

Children’s Television Programming

Reports (FCC Form 398). The

Commission’s rules currently state that

such reports shall be filed on an annual

basis for an experimental period of three

years, from January 1998 through

January 2000. Continuation of the

annual filing requirement will permit

the Commission to continue to enforce

the Children’s Television Act of 1990

(‘‘CTA’’), and its rules implementing the

CTA, by monitoring the amount and

quality of educational television

programming for children and industry

compliance with the FCC’s children’s

educational programming requirements.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

June 12, 2000; reply comments are due

on or before July 12, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Room

TW–A306, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim

Matthews, Policy and Rules Division,

Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418–2154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’), MM

00–44; FCC 00–93, adopted March 9,

2000; released April 6, 2000. The full

25896 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 87 / Thursday, May 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules

text of the Commission’s NPRM is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Dockets Branch (Room TW–A306),

445 12 St. SW, Washington, DC. The

complete text of this NPRM may also be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Services (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th St.,

NW, Washington, DC 20036.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

I. Introduction

1. This NPRM proposes to amend

§ 73.3526(e)(11)(iii) of the Commission’s

rules to continue indefinitely the

requirement that commercial broadcast

television licensees file with the

Commission, on an annual basis, their

quarterly Children’s Television

Programming Reports (FCC Form 398).

The Commission’s rules currently state

that such reports shall be filed on an

annual basis for an experimental period

of three years, from January 1998

through January 2000. Continuation of

the annual filing requirement will

permit the Commission to continue to

enforce the Children’s Television Act of

1990 (‘‘CTA’’), and its rules

implementing the CTA, by monitoring

the amount and quality of educational

television programming for children and

industry compliance with the

Commission’s children’s educational

programming requirements.

II. Background

2. The CTA requires the Commission,

in its review of each television

broadcast license renewal application,

to ‘‘consider the extent to which the

licensee . . . has served the educational

and informational needs of children

through the licensee’s overall

programming, including programming

specifically designed to serve such

needs.’’ In enacting the CTA, Congress

found that, while television can benefit

society by helping to educate and

inform children, there are significant

market disincentives for commercial

broadcasters to air children’s

educational and informational

programming. The objective of Congress

in enacting the CTA was to increase the

amount of educational and

informational programming available on

television. The CTA accomplished that

objective by placing on every television

licensee an obligation to provide such

programming, including programming

specifically designed to educate and

inform children, and by requiring the

FCC to enforce that obligation.

3. The Commission’s initial rules

implementing the CTA, adopted in

1991, included a very flexible definition

of educational programming and did not

establish quantitative guidelines

regarding the amount of educational

programming licensees were required to

provide. In addition, these initial rules

did not include measures designed to

inform the public about educational

programming. Within a few years after

these initial rules took effect, questions

began to be raised regarding the

effectiveness of the new rules, and in

particular about the content of the

programs stations claimed were

educational.

4. In August 1996, the Commission

adopted its current educational

programming rules to strengthen its

enforcement of the CTA (61 FR 43981,

August 27, 1996). The Commission’s

rules include several measures to

improve public access to information

about the availability of programming

‘‘specifically designed’’ to serve

children’s educational and

informational needs (otherwise known

as ‘‘core’’ programming). These

measures include a requirement that

licensees identify core programming at

the time it is aired and in information

provided to publishers of television

program guides. Licensees are also

required to designate a children’s

liaison at the station responsible for

collecting comments on the station’s

compliance with the CTA. In addition,

the rules also establish a definition of

‘‘core’’ programming as well as a threehour per week processing guideline

pursuant to which broadcasters airing at

least three hours per week of

programming that meets the definition

of ‘‘core’’ will receive staff-level

approval of their license renewal

applications.

5. One of the most important public

information measures adopted by the

Commission in 1996 is the requirement

that licensees complete a Children’s

Television Programming Report (FCC

Form 398) each calendar quarter.

Among other things, these Reports

identify the educational and

informational programs aired by the

licensee over the previous quarter and

the days and times these programs were

regularly scheduled, the age of the target

child audience for each program, and

the average number of hours per week

of core programming broadcast over the

past quarter. Licensees must include in

the Reports an explanation of how each

core program meets the definition of

‘‘core’’ programming adopted by the

Commission. Stations must also identify

in their Reports the core programs the

station plans to air during the next

calendar quarter.

6. The Reports are prepared on a

quarterly basis and must be placed in

the station’s public inspection file.

Stations are required to publicize the

existence and location of the reports. In

addition, as noted above, the rules

currently provide that, ‘‘for an

experimental period of three years’’

these Reports must be filed with the

Commission on an annual basis (four

quarterly reports filed jointly once a

year) on the following dates: January 10,

1998, January 10, 1999, and January 10,

2000. The Reports must be filed with

the Commission electronically, and the

Commission posts the Reports on the

FCC’s Internet home page where they

can be readily accessed by the public.

The address for the Commission’s home

page is: http://www.fcc.gov. The

Commission also encourages

broadcasters to make these Reports

available on their own websites.

III. Discussion

7. The public information initiatives

adopted in 1996 are an integral part of

the children’s programming rules. These

measures are designed to ensure that the

public, and especially parents, has

access to information regarding the

educational programming being aired by

broadcasters so that parents and others

can help achieve the goal of the CTA to

increase the amount of educational

programming available on television. In

adopting the public information

initiatives as part of its revised

educational programming rules, the

Commission explained their purpose as

follows:

8. We conclude that the market

inadequacies that led Congress to pass

the Children’s Television Act can be

addressed, in part, by enhancing

parents’ knowledge of children’s

educational programming. One way to

encourage licensees to provide such

programming is to encourage and enable

the public, especially parents, to

interact with broadcasters. Easy public

access to information permits the

Commission to rely more on

marketplace forces to achieve the goals

of the CTA and facilitates enforcement

of the statute by allowing parents,

educators, and others to actively

monitor a station’s performance. As CBS

‘‘wholeheartedly’’ agrees, ‘‘judgments of

the quality of a licensee’s programming,

educational or otherwise, are best made

by the audience, not the federal

government.’’ Thus, our rules should

facilitate easy access to information

regarding children’s educational

programming in the community.

9. Facilitating public access to the

information contained in the Children’s

Television Programming Reports helps

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 87 / Thursday, May 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules 25897

the marketplace to achieve the goals of

the CTA in a number of ways. Parents

who have access to information about

educational programming, such as the

titles of the programs, the times they are

regularly scheduled to air, and the age

for which the programs are intended,

can select such programming for their

children to watch, thereby increasing

the audience for such programs and the

incentive of broadcasters to air, and

producers to supply, more such

programs. Better information also helps

parents in working with broadcasters in

their local communities to improve

children’s educational programming

without government intervention. The

information contained in the Reports

can be used by parents, educators, and

others interested in educational

programming to monitor a station’s

performance in complying with the CTA

and the Commission’s rules. The

Commission encourages parents and

others to communicate directly with

stations and program producers

regarding the shows stations claim meet

the FCC’s definition of ‘‘core’’

programming. In this way, the public

can play an active role in helping to

enforce children’s programming

requirements. Finally, requiring

broadcasters to identify programming

they rely upon to meet their obligation

to air educational programming makes

broadcasters more accountable to the

public. Improving broadcaster

accountability minimizes the need for

government involvement to enforce the

CTA and helps to ensure that

broadcasters, with input from the

public, rather than the Commission

determine which television programs

serve children’s educational needs.

10. The requirement that broadcasters

file their Children’s Television

Programming Reports with the

Commission was initially adopted, on

an experimental basis, for a period of

three years. To date, Reports have been

filed for two successive years, January

10, 1998 and January 10, 1999. Under

the current rules, the filing requirement

expires after Reports for 1999 are filed

January 10, 2000. We believe that the

requirement that broadcasters file these

Reports with the FCC should be

continued. Therefore, we propose to

retain the filing requirement

indefinitely, and request comment on

this proposal.

11. Anecdotal evidence suggests that

organizations devoted to informing

parents and community members about

children’s programming use the reports

as a primary data source. For example,

the Center for Research on the

Influences of Television on Children at

the University of Texas reviews local

broadcasters’ reports as part of an

annual evaluation of children’s

programming in the Austin, Texas

market. The Center for Media Education

uses the reports to develop tools for

parents. Other organizations, including

the National Institute on Media and the

Family and the Annenberg Public Policy

Center at the University of

Pennsylvania, use the reports to track

national trends in children’s television

programming. The filing requirement is

an important part of the emphasis

placed by the rules on improving the

flow of information to the public about

educational programming. Filing

permits the Commission to place the

Reports on its website, making this

information easily accessible in one

central location. Members of the public

can view Reports from a number of

stations easily, and compare results,

without having to contact each station

individually. Continuation of the filing

requirement is also important to ensure

that the Commission itself has access to

information regarding licensee

compliance with the children’s

programming rules. Without the annual

filing requirement, licensees would be

required to report on their station’s

children’s programming only once every

eight years, at the end of the license

term. Extension of the license term to

eight years necessarily places a heavier

emphasis on facilitating public

monitoring of licensee compliance with

the rules, to assist the FCC in its

enforcement role. Among other things,

the Commission has relied upon

information in the Reports to evaluate

industry practices in connection with

preemption of children’s programming.

A review of the Children’s Television

Programming Reports filed with the

Commission for 1998 indicates that, of

the 4,964 quarterly reports filed, 63

reported less than 3 hours of core

children’s educational and

informational programming, 2,116

reported exactly 3 hours of core

programming, and 1,832 reported 4 or

more hours of core programming. In

adopting the children’s programming

rules, the Commission stated it would

monitor the broadcast industry’s

children’s educational programming

performance for three years based upon

the Children’s Television Programming

Reports filed with the Commission, and

would review the reports at the end of

the three-year period and take

appropriate action as necessary to

ensure that stations are complying with

the rules and guidelines. The

Commission will commence that review

after January 10, 2000, the filing due

date for the last Children’s Television

Programming Reports of the three-year

period.

12. We also request comment on

whether our rules should be revised to

require that Reports be filed quarterly, at

the time they are prepared, rather than

once a year. As broadcasters must

prepare the Reports quarterly, requiring

Reports to be filed on a quarterly basis

is unlikely to impose a significant

additional burden on licensees,

especially now that Reports are required

to be filed electronically and

transmission to the Commission should

require only a few additional

keystrokes. Finally, we ask commenters

to address whether any changes should

be made to FCC Form 398 to make the

Reports more informative or easier to

prepare. For example, are there

revisions to Form 398 that would make

it easier for the reader to determine the

number of times core programs are

preempted and to obtain information

about the rescheduling of any

preempted episodes?

IV. Administrative Matters

13. Comments and Reply Comments.

Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419 of

the Commission’s rules, interested

parties may file comments on or before

June 12, 2000 and reply comments on or

before July 12, 2000. Comments may be

filed using the Commission’s Electronic

Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper

copies. See Electronic Filing of

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings

(63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998).

14. Comments filed through the ECFS

can be sent as an electronic file via the

Internet to <http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/

ecfs.html>. Generally, only one copy of

an electronic submission must be filed.

If multiple docket or rulemaking

numbers appear in the caption of this

proceeding, however, commenters must

transmit one electronic copy of the

comments to each docket or rulemaking

number referenced in the caption. In

completing the transmittal screen,

commenters should include their full

name, 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, <your e-mail

address.’’ A sample form and directions

will be sent in reply.

15. 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 appear in

the caption of this proceeding,

commenters must submit two additional

25898 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 87 / Thursday, May 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules

copies for each additional docket or

rulemaking number. All filings must be

sent to the Commission’s Secretary,

Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the

Secretary, Federal Communications

Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW;

TW–A325, Washington, DC 20554.

16. Parties who choose to file by

paper should also submit their

comments on diskette. These diskettes

should be submitted to: Kim Matthews,

445 Twelfth Street, SW; 2–C225,

Washington, DC 20554. Such a

submission should be on a 3.5 inch

diskette formatted in an IBM compatible

format using WordPerfect 5.1 for

Windows or compatible software. The

diskette should be accompanied by a

cover letter and should be submitted in

‘‘read only’’ mode. The diskette should

be clearly labeled with the commenter’s

name, proceeding (including the docket

number (MM Docket No. 00–44), type of

pleading (comment or reply comment),

date of submission, and the name of the

electronic file on the diskette. The label

should also include the following

phrase ‘‘Disk Copy—Not an Original.’’

Each diskette should contain only one

party’s pleadings, preferably in a single

electronic file. In addition, commenters

must send diskette copies to the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 445 Twelfth Street, SW; CY–B402,

Washington, DC 20554.

17. Ex Parte Rules. This is a permitbut-disclose notice and comment

rulemaking proceeding. Ex parte

presentations are permitted except

during the Sunshine Agenda period,

provided they are disclosed as provided

in the Commission’s Rules. See

generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and

1.1206(a).

18. Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis. With respect to this Notice,

and Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) is contained in

Appendix A. As required by Section 603

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the

Commission has prepared an IRFA of

the expected impact on small entities of

the proposals contained in this Notice.

Written public comments are requested

on the IRFA. In order to fulfill the

mandate of the Contract With America

Advancement Act of 1996 regarding the

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,

we ask a number of questions in our

IRFA regarding the prevalence of small

business in the television broadcasting

industry. Comments on the IRFA must

be filed in accordance with the same

filing deadlines as comments on the

Notice, but they must have a distinct

heading designating them as responses

to the IRFA. The Secretary shall send a

copy of this Notice, including the IRFA,

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration in

accordance with Section 603(a) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, Public Law

No. 96–354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601

et seq. (1981), as amended.

19. Authority. This Notice is issued

pursuant to authority contained in

Sections 4(i), 303, and 307 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303, and

307.

VII. Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis

20. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 Analysis. This NPRM proposes to

continue indefinitely the requirement

that broadcast television licensees file

with the Commission their Children’s

Television Programming Reports on

FCC Form 398. In addition, the NPRM

invites comment on whether these

filings should be required on a

quarterly, rather than an annual, basis,

and on whether revisions should be

made to Form 398 to reduce the burden

on licensees. As part of our continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens, we

invite the general public and the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) to

take this opportunity to comment on the

information collections contained in

this NPRM, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law No. 104–13. Public and

agency comments are due at the same

time as other comments on this Notice;

OMB comments are due 60 days from

the date of publication of this Notice in

the Federal Register. 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.

In addition to filing comments with the

Secretary, a copy of any comments on

the information collections contained

herein should be submitted to Judy

Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW; 1–

C8004, Washington, DC 20554, or via

the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov and to

Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236

NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20503 or via the

Internet to fain_t@al.eop.gov.

21. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act

Analysis. As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603 (‘‘RFA’’),

the Commission has prepared an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(‘‘IRFA’’) of the expected impact on

small entities of the proposals contained

in this NPRM. Written public comments

are requested with respect to the IRFA.

These comments must be filed in

accordance with the same filing

deadlines for comments on the rest of

the NPRM, but they must have a

separate and distinct heading,

designating the comments as responses

to the IRFA. The Commission shall send

a copy of this NPRM, including the

IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy

of the Small Business Administration in

accordance with the RFA, 5 U.S.C.

603(a).

22. Reasons Why Agency Action is

Being Considered. Our goals in

commencing this proceeding and in

formulating the proposals in the NPRM

are to ensure that the FCC and the

public have adequate information

regarding educational programming for

children and licensee compliance with

the CTA and the FCC’s rules.

23. Need For and Objectives of the

Proposed Rule Changes. Our goal in

commencing this proceeding and in

formulating the proposals in the NPRM

is to ensure that the public continues to

have access to information regarding the

educational programming being aired by

television broadcast licensees to assist

parents in selecting educational

programming for their children and to

assist the public in monitoring the

performance of stations in complying

with the CTA and the FCC’s rules. Our

goal is also to ensure that the FCC

receives adequate information to enforce

the CTA and its rules, and to permit it

to provide a central location for access

to Children’s Television Reports on the

FCC’s Internet website.

24. Legal Basis. Authority for the

actions proposed in the NPRM may be

found in Sections 4(i) and 303 and 307

of the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303, and

307.

25. Recording, Recordkeeping, and

Other Compliance Requirements. The

NPRM proposes to continue indefinitely

existing filing requirements, and invites

comments on whether licensees should

be required to file Children’s Television

Programming Reports on a quarterly

rather than an annual basis.

26. Federal Rules that Overlap,

Duplicate, or Conflict with the Proposed

Rules. The rules proposed in this

proceeding do not overlap, duplicate, or

conflict with any other rules.

27. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which the

Rules Would Apply. Under the RFA,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 87 / Thursday, May 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules 25899

small entities may include small

organizations, small businesses, and

small governmental jurisdictions. 5

U.S.C. 601(6). The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601(3),

generally defines the term ‘‘small

business’’ as having the same meaning

as the term ‘‘small business concern’’

under the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C.

632. 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’’). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3),

the statutory definition of a small

business applies ‘‘unless an agency after

consultation with the Office of

Advocacy of the SBA and after

opportunity for public comment,

establishes one or more definitions of

such term which are appropriate to the

activities of the agency and publishes

such definition(s) in the Federal

Register. There are approximately 1,240

existing commercial television

broadcasters of all sizes that may be

affected by the proposals contained in

this NRPM.

28. Any Significant Alternatives

Minimizing the Impact on Small

Entities and Consistent with the Stated

Objectives: This NPRM solicits

comment on a number of proposals,

including continuation of the existing

requirement to file Children’s

Television Programming Reports with

the Commission. We seek comment in

the NPRM on this proposal as well as on

other issues, and on whether there is a

significant economic impact on any

class of small licensees as a result of any

of our proposals. Any significant

alternatives presented in the comments

will be considered.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–11098 Filed 5–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

48 CFR Parts 1503 and 1552

[FRL–6588–2]

Acquisition Regulation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is issuing this rule to

amend the EPA Acquisition Regulation

(EPAAR) to add a contract clause to

Agency contracts whereby contractors,

under contracts exceeding $1,000,000,

are required to display EPA Office of the

Inspector General Hotline posters

within contractor work areas.

DATES: Comments should be submitted

not later than July 3, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be

submitted to Larry Wyborski, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Acquisition Management

(3802R), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue

NW, Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Wyborski, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Acquisition

Management (3802R), 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,

DC 20460; (202) 564–4369,

wyborski.larry@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background Information

EPA’s Office of Inspector General

(OIG) requested that contractor

personnel under EPA contracts have

access to information for contacting the

OIG in the event they wish to report

waste, fraud or abuse under an EPA

contract. The information will be

available in an EPA OIG Hotline Poster.

A contract clause will notify the

contractor of the requirement to display

the hotline posters and will provide a

reference for obtaining the posters.

B. Executive Order 12866

This is not a significant regulatory

action for purposes of Executive Order

12866; therefore, no review is required

at the Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs, within the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because this rule does not

contain information collection

requirements for the approval of OMB

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq).

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as

Amended by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

The RFA generally requires an agency

to prepare a regulatory flexibility

analysis of any rule subject to notice

and comment rulemaking requirements

under the Administrative Procedure Act

or any other statute, unless the agency

certifies that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small

organizations, and small governmental

jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impact

of this rule on small entities, small

entity is defined as: (1) A small business

that meets the definition of a small

business found in the Small Business

Act and codified at 13 CFR 121.201; (2)

a small governmental jurisdiction that is

a government of a city, county, town,

school district or special district with a

population of less than 50,000; and (3)

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently

owned and operated and is not

dominant in its field.

After considering the economic

impacts of this proposed rule on small

entities, I certify that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

In determining whether a rule has a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities, the

impact of concern is any adverse

economic impact on small entities,

since the primary purpose of the

regulatory flexibility analyses is to

identify and address regulatory

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any

significant economic impact of the

proposed rule on small entities.’’ 5

U.S.C. Sections 603 and 604. Thus, an

agency may certify that a rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities if

the rule relieves regulatory burden, or

otherwise has a positive economic effect

on all of the small entities subject to the

rule. This direct final rule does not have

a significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The

requirements under the rule impose no

reporting, record-keeping, or

compliance costs on small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) Public Law

104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess their

regulatory actions on State, local and

Tribal governments and the private

sector. This rule does not contain a

Federal mandate that may result in

expenditures of $100 million or more

for State, local, and Tribal governments,

in the aggregate, or the private sector in

any one year. Any private sector costs

for this action relate to paperwork

requirements and associated

expenditures, which would be far below

the level established for UMRA

applicability. Thus, the rule is not

subject to the requirements of sections

202 and 205 of the UMRA.