31270 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today’s

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by July 17, 2000.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: April 24, 2000.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F—California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(159)(v)(E), revising

paragraph (c)(184) introductory text,

and adding paragraphs (c)(184)(i)(B)(9),

and (c) (222)(i)(A)(2) to read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(159) * * *

(v) * * *

(E) Previously approved on July 12,

1990 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control

District Rules 1105 and 1117.

* * * * *

(184) New and amended regulations

for the following APCDs were submitted

on May 13, 1991, by the Governor’s

designee.

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(9) Previously approved on August 11,

1992 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control

District Rule 1123.

* * * * *

(222) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(2) Previously approved on July 14,

1995 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control

District Rule 1115.

* * * * *

3. Section 52.222 is being amended by

adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (b)(4) to

read as follows:

§ 52.222 Negative declarations.

(a) * * *

(6) Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District.

(i) Motor Vehicle Assembly Line

Coating Operations submitted on

January 12, 1999 and adopted on

November 18, 1997.

(ii) Refinery Process Turnarounds

submitted on February 16, 1999 and

adopted on November 18, 1997.

(iii) Marine Vessel Coating

Operations, Marine Tank Vessel

Operations, and Thermal Enhanced Oil

Recovery Wells submitted on June 23,

1998 and adopted on January 20, 1998.

* * * * *

(4) Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District.

(i) Boilers and Process Heaters In

Petroleum Refineries submitted on May

13, 1999 and adopted on April 21, 1998.

(ii) Cement Kilns and Glass Melting

Furnaces submitted on July 23, 1999

and adopted on March 16, 1999.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–11996 Filed 5–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[CS Docket No. 97–98; FCC 00–116]

Rules and Policies Governing Pole

Attachments

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document addresses

issues raised in the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking relating to the formula used

to calculate maximum just and

reasonable rates utilities may charge for

pole attachments made to a pole, duct,

conduit or right-of-way pursuant. This

document amends the formula so that it

reflects the Commission’s current

accounting rules that apply to local

exchange carriers; clarifies the treatment

of accumulated depreciation attributable

to removal costs to eliminate negative

results; and adopts a conduit

methodology for determining the

maximum just and reasonable rates

utilities may charge cable systems and

telecommunications carriers for their

use of conduit systems.

DATES: Effective June 16, 2000, except

for §§ 1.1404 and 1.1409, which contain

information collection requirements that

have not been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget. The

Commission will publish a document in

the Federal Register announcing the

effective date of these sections. Written

comments by the public on any new

and/or modified information collection

requirements should be submitted on or

before July 17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: A copy of any comments on

the information collection requirements

contained herein should be submitted to

Judy Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 1–C804, 445 12th

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554 or

via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Costello at (202) 418–7200 or

via the Internet at kcostell@fcc.gov, or

Cheryl King at (202) 418–2284 or via the

Internet at cking@fcc.gov. For additional

information concerning the information

collection requirements contained

herein, contact Judy Boley at (202) 418–

0214, or via the Internet at

jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order, CS Dkt. No. 97–98, FCC 00–

116, adopted March 29, 2000; released

April 3, 2000. The full text of the

Commission’s Report and Order is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center (Room CY–A257)

at its headquarters, 445 12th Street, SW,

Washington DC 20554, or may be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036, or

may be reviewed via Internet at http://

www.fcc.gov/csb/.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31271

Paperwork Reduction Act

The requirements adopted in the

Report and Order have been analyzed

with respect to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘1995 Act’’) and

found to impose no new but some

modified information collection

requirements on utilities. The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public to comment

on the information collection

requirements contained in the Report

and Order, as required by the 1995 Act.

Public comments are due July 17, 2000.

Comments should address: (a) whether

the 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.

OMB Approval Number: 3060–0392.

Title: 47 CFR 1 Subpart J—Pole

Attachment Complaint Procedures.

Type of Review: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit; State, Local or Tribal

Government.

Number of Respondents: 1,381.

Estimated Time Per Response: .5–35

hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Total Annual Burden to Respondents:

3,047 hours.

Synopsis of the Report and Order

I. Introduction

1. The Report and Order (‘‘Report and

Order’’) addresses issues raised in

Amendment of Rules and Policies

Governing Pole Attachments, Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, CS Docket No.

97–98, 62 FR 18074 (‘‘NPRM’’) relating

to the maximum just and reasonable

rates utilities may charge for ‘‘pole

attachments’’ made to a pole, duct,

conduit or right-of-way. Generally, the

commenters represent the interests of

one of the following three categories: (1)

Electric utilities; (2) cable operators; and

(3) telecommunications carriers. In the

Report and Order, we adopt amended

rules.

II. Background

2. Section 224 of the Communications

Act (‘‘Pole Attachment Act’’) grants the

Commission authority to regulate the

rates, terms, and conditions governing

pole attachments and requires that such

rates, terms and conditions be just and

reasonable. The Commission is also

authorized to adopt procedures

necessary to hear and to resolve

complaints concerning such rates,

terms, and conditions. Beginning in

1978, the Commission developed a

methodology to determine the

maximum allowable pole attachment

rate under section 224(d)(1), (the ‘‘Cable

Formula’’), in Adoption of Rules for the

Regulation of Cable Television Pole

Attachments, First Report and Order, CC

Docket No. 78–144 (‘‘First Report and

Order’’); Second Report and Order

(‘‘Second Report and Order’’); and

Memorandum and Order (‘‘Third

Order’’), implementing a cost

methodology premised on historical or

embedded costs. In 1987, the

Commission amended and clarified the

methodology for determining rates in

Amendment of Rules and Policies

Governing the Attachment of Cable

Television Hardware to Utility Poles, CC

Docket No. 86–212, 52 FR 31769,

August 24, 1987 (‘‘Pole Attachment

Order’’).

3. Revisions to the Cable Formula and

the formula for pole attachment rates in

conduit systems adopted in the Report

and Order will apply to attachments

made by cable systems and

telecommunications carriers, until the

new rules for attachments by

telecommunications carriers providing

telecommunications services

established under the

Telecommunications Report and Order,

CS Docket No. 97–151, FCC 98–20, 63

FR 12013, March 12, 1998, become

effective in 2001. After February 8,

2001, the Cable Formula for poles and

the formula adopted for use of conduit

systems adopted in the Report and

Order, will continue to apply to pole

attachments used by a cable television

system, as long as the pole attachment

is not also used to provide

telecommunications services.

III. Pricing Methodologies

1. Modification of the Cable Formula

4. The Commission has employed

historical costs in Cable Formula

calculations since the passage of the

Pole Attachment Act in 1978. Further,

the United States Supreme Court has

upheld the application of an historical

cost methodology for determining pole

attachment rates. The continued use of

a clear rate formula by the Commission

is essential to encourage parties to

negotiate for pole attachment rates,

terms and conditions. The continued

use of historical costs accomplishes key

objectives of assuring, to both the utility

and the attaching parties, just and

reasonable rates; establishes

accountability for prior cost recoveries;

and accords with generally accepted

accounting principles.

2. Gross Versus Net Book Costs

5. The Cable Formula incorporates net

figures for the calculation of maximum

pole attachment rates. We compute the

carrying charge elements for

maintenance, depreciation and

administrative expenses, as well as for

return on investment and taxes, using

net book costs. For example, the net cost

of a bare pole component is derived

from the gross investment in poles less

accumulated depreciation and

accumulated deferred income taxes. The

important goal is to ensure that like

figures are used, whether net or gross

and if both parties to a pole attachment

complaint agree, the pole attachment

rates may be computed using gross book

costs. We will continue to use net

figures in the Cable Formula. However,

as in the past, when all parties to a

complaint agree, we will allow the use

of gross book costs.

IV. Armis Uniform System of Accounts

6. Our Automated Reporting

Management Information System

(‘‘ARMIS’’) Report 43–02 Uniform

System of Accounts (‘‘USOA’’) contains

the financial operating results of a local

exchange carrier’s telecommunications

operations for every Part 32 account. We

affirm the use of Part 32 Uniform

System of Accounts for local exchange

carriers, as reported to ARMIS, in

determining various components of the

Cable Formula. These specific accounts

are discussed in the Report and Order

relating to various aspects of the Cable

Formula.

V. Formula for Determining Attachment

Rates for Poles

7. The Commission uses the following

Cable Formula in disputed cases to set

rates to be charged by utilities for

attachments on poles:

Maximum

Rate

Space Occu Cost of a

Bare Pole

Carrying pied

Total Usable Space Charge Rate = ××

31272 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

A. Percentage of Total Usable Space

Occupied

8. The presumptions used in the

Cable Formula have been repeatedly

affirmed since the enactment of the Pole

Attachment Act. We again decline to

modify the well established

presumptions leading to 7.4% as the

percentage of usable space occupied by

a pole attachment.

1. Safety Space

9. Because the electric supply cable

precludes other attachments from

occupying the safety space, which

would otherwise be usable space, the

safety space is effectively usable space

occupied by the supply cable. So long

as their crews make the installation, the

electric utilities are not limited by the

National Electrical Safety Code in what

equipment or cables they may attach in

the safety space. Accordingly, we reject

the electric utilities’ arguments to

reduce the presumptive usable space of

13.5 feet by 40 inches.

2. Minimum Ground Clearance

10. The Commission established that

a presumptive average 18 feet of the

pole space is reserved for ground

clearance. The 18 foot presumption is

not dictated by the National Electric

Safety Code, but is an average to be used

in the estimation of total usable space.

In the Usable Space Order, we

determined that the selection of the 18

foot figure reflected various elements

such as differing pole heights, as well as

National Electrical Safety Code

standards that vary depending on the

physical environment of the pole.

Factors used to determine the National

Electrical Safety Code standard of

minimum ground clearance, include

whether the wires or cables cross over

railroad tracks, roads, or driveways and

the amount of voltage transferred

through the cables. The rebuttable

nature of the usable space presumption

allows for the use of a different

minimum ground clearance when

necessary to improve the accuracy of the

calculations. Presumptions were

adopted to encourage expeditious

response to complaint information

requests. We have not been persuaded

that a departure from our well

established presumption of an average

minimum ground clearance of 18 feet is

warranted.

3. 30 Foot Poles

11. The record confirms the prevalent

use of 30 foot poles and reflects that

exclusion of such poles from the Cable

Formula calculations could distort the

resulting rate by excluding a significant

portion of local exchange carrier plant

investment from the rate calculation.

We conclude that a distorted inventory

of poles would be reflected if utilities

were allowed to ‘‘opt out’’ or exclude

their poles of 30 feet or less when

calculating their pole attachment rates.

4. Weight and Wind Load Factors

12. The current method for allotting

space to a pole attachment accounts

directly for the wind load factor. The

weight load factor is considered when

deciding whether a stronger pole is

necessary as part of make-ready work.

Many of these factors are included in

accounts in the maintenance element of

the carrying charge rate. For electric

utility owned poles, which report data

for regulatory purposes to the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission

(‘‘FERC’’), FERC Account 593 includes

pole related expenses for overhead lines

and allows for the recovery of the cost

of labor, materials used and expenses

incurred in the maintenance of

overhead distribution facilities. The

Commission’s ARMIS rules for local

exchange carrier accounting provide for

the recovery of damages and pole

related expenses caused by storms or

other casualties. The complete costs of

the physical attachments of an attaching

entity are normally paid to the pole line

owner as a condition of attachment,

addressing such factors as weight, wind

load and safety space. These make-ready

costs have been fully recovered.

B. Cost of a Bare Pole

1. Local Exchange Carrier Pole Owner

Formula Methodology

13. We adopt the following formula to

determine the net cost of a bare pole for

local exchange carrier pole owners:

Net Cost of

LEC

Account Accumulated Depreciation Accumulated Deferred

a Bare Pole 

 (Account 3100)(Poles) Income Taxes (Account 4100 + 4340)(Poles)

Number of Poles ( )

= × .

− −

0 95

2411

14. In this formula Accumulated

Depreciation (Poles) and Accumulated

Deferred Income Taxes (Poles) are

derived from composite Part 32

accounts attributable to poles.

Specifically, Accumulated Depreciation

(Poles) represents the share of Part 32

Account 3100 (Accumulated

Depreciation) that corresponds to

Account 2411, and Accumulated

Deferred Income Taxes (Poles)

represents the shares of Part 32

Accounts 4100 (Net Current Deferred

Operating Income Taxes) and 4340 (Net

Noncurrent Deferred Operating Income

Taxes) that correspond to Account 2411.

2. Electric Utility Pole Owner Formula

Methodology

15. We affirm the following formula to

determine the net cost of a bare pole for

electric utilities:

Net Cost of

Electric

Account 36 Accumulated Depreciation Accumulated Deferred

a Bare Pole 

4 (Poles)(Account 108) Income Taxes (Poles)(Account 109)

Number of Poles ( )

= × .

− −

0 85

16. Under this formula, Accumulated

Depreciation (Poles) represents the

share of FERC Account 108

(Accumulated provision for

depreciation of electric utility plant

(Major only) a composite account that is

required to be maintained on a

subsidiary basis, that corresponds to

Account 364 (Poles, Towers, and

Fixtures). Similarly, Accumulated

Deferred Income Taxes represents the

share of composite FERC Account 190

(Accumulated deferred income taxes)

that corresponds to Account 364. An

adjustment to a utilty’s net pole

investment (15% for electric utilities

and 5% for local exchange carriers) is

necessary to eliminate the investment in

crossarms and other non-pole related

items.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31273

3. Total Number of Poles

17. We have previously concluded

that poles of 30 feet or less should be

included in calculations of the Cable

Formula in our discussion about pole

height and the usable space

presumption. Based on our review of

the record in this proceeding, we also

conclude that poles of 30 feet or less

should therefore be included in the

inventory of the total number of poles

owned or used, jointly-owned or solelyowned, by a utility. The exclusion of

these poles would result in a distorted

and inaccurate pole inventory resulting

in an unjust and unreasonable pole

attachment rate because they are being

used by the utility for their business

services and by cable operators and

telecommunications carriers to provide

their respective services.

C. Carrying Charge Rate (Poles)

18. The carrying charge rate reflects

those costs incurred by the utility in

owning and maintaining poles

regardless of the presence of pole

attachments. The elements of the

carrying charge rate are: administrative,

maintenance, depreciation, taxes and

cost of capital (rate of return). The

carrying charge rate factor of the Cable

Formula is calculated as follows:

Carrying

Charge Rate = Administrative + Maintenance + Depreciation + Taxes + Return

To calculate the carrying charge rate,

the Commission developed a formula

that relates each of these elements to a

pole owner’s net pole investment. Full

Cable Formulas, with all components,

elements and accounts used to

determine a maximum just and

reasonable rate for pole attachments to

electric and local exchange carrier

utility poles and conduit, are included

in the appendices to the Report and

Order.

1. The Administrative Element

19. The following formula is adopted

to determine the administrative element

of the carrying charge rate of the Cable

Formula for local exchange carrier pole

owners:

Administrative Administrative and General (Accounts 6710 + 6720)

t Investment

01 tion

00 Taxes, Plant

(Accounts 4100 & 4340)

Element Gross Plan

Account 20

Accumulated Deprecia

Account 31

Accumulated Deferred =

( ) − ( ) −

2. The Maintenance Element

a. LEC ARMIS Part 32 Account 6411

20. Account 6411 includes the rents

paid by the local exchange carrier to

electric utilities for the local exchange

carrier’s use of the electric utility’s poles

for the local exchange carrier’s own core

business. Inclusion of the local

exchange carrier’s rental fees paid to the

electric utility in the Cable Formula

would result in the electric utility being

paid twice. These fees will be deducted

from the total amount reported to

Account 6411.

b. Electric Utility FERC Account 590

21. We reject our tentative conclusion

that some portion of FERC Account 590

should be included in the maintenance

element for electric utilities. We believe

that any increased accuracy that would

be derived from including the minute

percentage of pole related expenses that

may be included in Account 590, is

outweighed by the complexity of

arriving at an appropriate and equitable

percentage of the expenses.

3. The Depreciation Element

22. We redefine Net Pole Investment

for Local Exchange Carriers as:

Net Pole

Investment

Gross

Account 

Accumulated

Account 31

 Pole Accumulated Deferred

Investment Depreciation on (Poles)

00

 Income Taxes (Poles)

(Accounts 4100 & 4340)

=− −

( ) 2411 ( )

where Accumulated Depreciation

(Poles) includes only that portion of

Account 3100 which arises from the

depreciation of Account 2411. The

portion of Accumulated Depreciation

(Poles) attributable to removal costs

shall be treated as an offset to gross

removal costs when calculating future

net salvage value. This allows a proper

matching of depreciation and

corresponding sources, and provides an

accurate basis for calculating investment

returns.

4. The Taxes Element

23. The taxes element of the carrying

charge rate for local exchange carrier

pole owners is calculated under the

following formula:

Tax Operating Taxes (Accounts 7200)

t Investment

01 tion

00 Taxes

(Plant, Accounts 4100 & 4340)

Element Gross Plan

Account 20

Accumulated Deprecia

Account 31

Accumulated Deferred =

( ) − ( ) −

Although a one to one matching of tax

elements from Part 31 to Part 32 may

not be achievable in all instances, we

believe the proposed tax element

formula will provide reasonable results

in an expeditious manner.

5. The Rate of Return Element

24. The rate of return element is

currently taken from the rate of return

authorized for the utilities’ intrastate

services, but many states are moving

31274 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

away from this type of regulation. The

Commission has adopted an annual rate

of return for the interstate access

services of local exchange carriers of

11.25%. We affirm the continued use of

the rate of return authorized by the state

for intrastate services of the utility,

when available; however, we will use,

as a default rate of return for utilities

when a state authorized rate is not

available, the rate of return set by the

Commission for local exchange carriers

as it is modified from time to time,

covering the appropriate period in the

rate dispute.

VI. Formula for Determining Conduit

Attachment Rates

25. Conduits are structures that

provide physical protection for cables

and allow new cables to be added

inexpensively along a route, without

having to dig up the landscape, streets

and other structures in the community

each time a new cable is installed. A

collection of conduits, together with

their supporting infrastructure,

constitutes a conduit system. A conduit

consists of one or more ducts, which are

the enclosures that carry the cables.

Often, when cable system or

telecommunications carriers’ cables are

placed in a duct, three or more inner

ducts are inserted into the duct allowing

‘‘one duct to be treated more like

conduit.’’ Congress authorized the

Commission to regulate rates, terms, and

conditions for pole attachments in ducts

and conduits under section 224 which

states:

* * * a rate is just and reasonable if it

assures a utility the recovery of not less than

the additional costs of providing pole

attachments, nor more than an amount

determined by multiplying the percentage of

the * * * total duct or conduit capacity,

which is occupied by the pole attachment, by

the sum of the operating expenses and actual

capital costs of the utility attributable to the

entire * * * duct [or] conduit.

1. Conduit Formula Methodology

26. We believe it is appropriate to use

system-wide data for establishing the

maximum rate for use of a conduit.

Necessary data is available in

underlying records filed by electric

utilities to support claims in sworn

FERC submissions, and only in rare

instances would a utility lack detailed

information because it has no records.

Where such records do not exist, other

sources of information may be used.

Electric utilities have demonstrated

their ability to calculate a rate by

applying the formula. Although the

conduits which comprise a conduit

system may vary widely from urban to

suburban or rural locales, we will use

the system-wide historical cost of the

conduit in the formula.

2. Factors of the Conduit Formula

27. The first factor of the formula,

Conduit Capacity, is determined using

the following variables: The Number of

Inner Ducts placed in the duct (if there

are no inner ducts the value would be

presumed to be two, reflecting the

rebuttable presumption that not more

than half of a duct is occupied); and the

Number of Ducts in the conduit system

(which does not include collapsed or

otherwise damaged ducts that are not

repairable). This is presumed to be the

average number of ducts per conduit for

the system.

28. The second factor of the formula,

Net Linear Cost of Conduit, is

determined using the following

additional variables: Net Conduit

Investment (gross conduit investment

less the accumulated depreciation and

accumulated deferred taxes); and

System Duct Length, the length of all

ducts in the system, minus the length of

collapsed ducts and the length of ducts

that for other reasons are physically

unable to contain cable. The System

Duct Length may be arrived at in one of

three ways: First, it may be obtained

from available records. Second, the

length of the conduit in the system may

be multiplied by an estimated average

number of ducts per conduit. Third, the

length of all ducts in the system is the

sum of the products of the length of

each conduit times the number of ducts

in that conduit.

29. Calculation of the maximum rate

may be simplified by using the

presumptions and using the Net Linear

Cost of a Conduit for the second term in

the formula. The formula is:

Maximum Ra

System

te Net Condui

- Wide)

 

 Duct

Avg. No. of Ducts

[Percentage of 

Conduit Capacity]

 

t Investment

System Conduit Length Carrying

Charge Rate

[Net Linear Cost

of a Conduit]

(

/ = × ×

1 2

a. Percentage of Total Capacity

Occupied

i. Total Duct or Conduit Capacity

30. The total capacity of a duct or

conduit is the entire volume of available

capacity in the conduit system. All costs

associated with the construction of the

conduit system are considered in

determining the cost of this total

capacity. We will not allow capacity

designated for maintenance, future

business plans, or municipal set-asides

to be subtracted from the total duct or

conduit capacity. The record supports

our finding that capacity in a duct or

conduit that is usable for any of these

purposes is part of the total duct or

conduit capacity.

ii. Occupied Capacity, the Half-Duct

Presumption

31. Presumptions are used in the

Cable Formula to expedite the

calculations of a just and reasonable rate

so that complicated surveys, accounting

and calculations may be avoided. We

retain the half-duct rebuttable

presumption that an attachment

occupies a maximum of one half of a

duct. Communications cables may, and

often do, share a duct. The National

Electrical Safety Code requires that,

where electric supply cables share a

duct with communications cables, the

cables be maintained by the utility. The

capacity is available to other

communications cables and is,

therefore, not occupied.

32. Some cable operators assert that

even the application of the half duct

methodology will result in rates that are

unreasonably high in light of current

iner duct technology. The term inner

duct generally refers to small diameter

(1′′ or 11⁄2′′) pipe or tubing placed inside

a conventional duct to allow the

installation of multiple wires or cables,

and use of inner duct is a common

practice. The half duct presumption is

rebuttable, and the presence of inner

duct is adequate rebuttal, and we have

made direct provision in the formula for

that contingency. Where inner-duct is

installed, either by the attacher or in a

previous installation, the maximum rate

will be reduced in proportion to the

fraction of the duct occupied. That

fraction will be one divided by the

number of inner ducts in the duct, using

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31275

the default presumption of capacity

occupied of one-half duct, or the actual

percentage of capacity occupied.

3. Net Linear Cost of Conduit

33. To arrive at a system investment

for use in the conduit formula we

identify the net linear cost of the

conduit system. To accomplish this, the

utility must first establish the Net

Conduit Investment as discussed below.

a. Net Conduit Investment

34. The conduit formula requires the

determination of the utility’s net linear

cost of its conduit system (‘‘Net Conduit

Investment’’), calculated as follows:

Net Condui

Investment

Gross Cond

ARMIS Acco

FERC Accou Conduit Conduit

t uit Investment

unt 2441/

nt 366)

 Accumulated Depreciation Accumulated Deferred Taxes =− − ( ( ) ( )

35. Where Gross Conduit Investment

for the local exchange carrier consists of

Part 32 Account 2441. For the electric

utility, Gross Conduit Investment is

reflected in FERC Part 101 Account 366.

For local exchange carriers,

Accumulated Depreciation (Conduit)

represents the share of ARMIS Account

3100 that corresponds to Account 2441.

For electric utilities, Accumulated

Depreciation (Conduit) represents the

share of FERC Account 108 that

corresponds to Gross Conduit

Investment valuations included in

Account 366.

36. The formula for calculation of the

Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes

(conduit) is:

Accumulated Deferred

Income Tax

Conduit

Gross Cond

es 

uit Investment

Total Gross Plant

 Total Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes

( )

= ×

Total Accumulated Deferred Income

Taxes for electric utilities are based on

FERC Account 190. Because the local

exchange carrier conduit owner keeps

conduit specific data for its

accumulated deferred income taxes, we

will allow a local exchange carrier to

use that data in the rate calculation, as

long as it is readily available.

b. System Duct Length

37. The denominator for the Net

Linear Cost of Conduit element within

the formula is based on duct length. The

net cost data is available from FERC

reports and, although electric utilities

are not required to report the linear

footage of conduit deployed, they

routinely produce linear footage data

during state conduit rate proceedings.

Electric utility corporate or engineering

departments have records on installed

plant. Moreover, when a utility is

unable to obtain the requisite data,

information from other sources may be

used. A determination of the total length

of duct and conduit in the system can

be made with a precision comparable to

that reached in determining the number

of poles owned by the utility. The utility

must, however, specify the method used

for computing the duct length and must

disclose this information to all attachers

upon request.

4. Carrying Charge Rate (Conduit)

38. The elements of the carrying

charge rate are: Administrative,

maintenance, depreciation, taxes and

rate of return. The Cable Formula and

all components, elements and accounts

used to calculate a maximum rate for

use of electric and local exchange

carrier utility conduit systems are

discussed in the Report and Order. To

calculate the carrying charge rate, the

Commission developed a formula that

relates each of these elements to a

utility’s net plant investment

appropriate to the location of the pole

attachment (e.g., poles, conduit system,

right-of-way). That formula is:

Carrying

Charge Rate = Administrative + Maintenance + Depreciation + Taxes + Rate of Return

39. The administrative, taxes, and rate

of return elements will be the same for

use in a formula for pole attachments in

conduits and rights-of-way as on poles.

The maintenance and depreciation

elements, with the accounts and

methodologies specific to conduits, are

delineated in the Report and Order.

a. Maintenance Element

40. For purposes of the calculation of

the maintenance element, the

denominator is the net conduit

investment which equals the sum of

gross investment, minus accumulated

depreciation related to conduit systems,

minus accumulated deferred income

taxes related to conduit systems.

i. Conduit Owned by a Local Exchange

Carrier

41. We use the following formula to

determine the maintenance carrying

charge rate element for underground

conduit systems owned by a local

exchange carrier.

Maintenance 41

41 Accumulated Depreciation, conduit Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes

Net Conduit Investment]

Element

Account 64

Account 24 = − −

[

31276 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

ii. Electric Utility Owned Conduit

42. The formula and FERC accounts

used for the maintenance element of the

carrying charge rate for electric utility

conduit owners is as follow:

Maintenance = Account 594 (Maintenance of Underground Lines)

 in

66, 367, & 369

 

Depreciation

66, 367, & 369

 

Deferred Income Taxes

Related to

66, 367, & 369

Element Investment

Accounts 3

Related to

Accounts 3 Accounts 3

















− 















− 















b. Depreciation Element

43. We adopt our proposed formula,

as modified, using LEC ARMIS Account

2441 and electric utility FERC Account

366 for the Gross Conduit Investment in

calculating the depreciation element, as

follows:

Depreciation = 

Gross Conduit Investment

(ARMIS Account 2441/FERC Accounts 366)

Net Conduit Investment 

Depreciation

Rate

for Conduit Element ×

VII. Final Regulatory Flexibility Act

Analysis

44. As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (‘‘RFA’’), an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(‘‘IRFA’’) was incorporated in the Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking, CS Docket No.

97–98, 62 FR 18074 (‘‘NPRM’’). The

Commission sought written public

comment on the proposals in the NPRM

including comment on the IRFA. The

comments received are discussed below.

This present Final Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (‘‘FRFA’’) conforms to the

RFA.

1. Need for, and Objectives of, the

Report and Order

45. In 1987, the Commission adopted

its current pole attachment formula for

calculating the maximum just and

reasonable rates utilities may charge

cable systems for pole attachments.

Since then the Commission replaced its

accounting system for telephone

companies, creating Part 32. This

created a need to advise telephone

companies about how the new system

should be used in the pole attachment

formula. The Telecommunications Act

of 1996 made pole attachment rules

applicable to telecommunications

providers. The existing pole attachment

formula applies to them until February

8, 2001. This gave rise to a need to

ensure that the pole attachments rules

would appropriately accommodate

these new attachers. The use of conduit

by cable systems and had not yet been

addressed in detail by the Commission.

This needs to be done in light of the

anticipated number of new attachers

whose entry into the marketplace the

Commission wishes to facilitate. We

recognize that a significant number of

new attachers might be small

businesses.

46. The objectives of the rules

adopted herein are consistent with

Congressional intent to provide a clear

methodology to determine just and

reasonable pole attachment rates in a

manner that uses publicly available and

verifiable data whenever possible. The

objectives of the rules adopted herein

change the formula methodology used

to determine a just and reasonable pole

attachment rate to reflect the present

Part 32 accounting system for telephone

companies that replaced the former Part

31 rules in 1988. Finally, the objectives

of the rules adopted herein are to

identify a conduit methodology that will

determine the maximum just and

reasonable rates utilities may charge

cable operators and telecommunications

carriers for pole attachments to conduit

systems. Although our rules do not

differentiate between large and small

businesses, our use of presumptions and

publicly available data in our

methodology ensures that small

businesses will not be discouraged from

seeking recourse with the Commission

against the imposition of unreasonable

pole attachment rates.

2. Summary of Significant Issues Raised

by Public Comments in Response to the

IRFA

47. Small Cable Business Association

(‘‘SCBA’’) filed comments in response to

the IRFA contained in the NPRM, and,

to the extent they are relevant to the

issues in this proceeding, we

incorporate them herein by reference.

SCBA claims in its IRFA comments that,

because of the statutory exclusion of

cooperatives from the definition of

utility, section 224 does not minimize

market entry barriers for small cable

operators. According to SCBA, the IRFA

in the NPRM fails to consider this issue.

SCBA claims that small cable systems

will be particularly hurt by the statutory

exemption of cooperatives from the

definition of utility because small cable

systems often operate in rural areas and

therefore necessarily attach their plant

to rural telephone and electric

cooperatives. In its Reply to the SCBA’s

comments, the National Telephone

Cooperative Association responded that

‘‘ * * * the exemption [of cooperatives

from section] 224 does not deprive

SCBA members of available legal

remedies in connection with pole

attachment agreements negotiated with

exempt electric or telephone

cooperatives.’’ We note that the SCBA

does not appear to be claiming that our

rules will disproportionately burden

small cable systems, but that where our

rules do not apply, small cable system

operators will be disproportionately

harmed. Because the exemption for

cooperatives was set forth by Congress

clearly in section 224(a)(1), the

Commission is left no discretion to

address SCBA’s concerns in this regard.

In general comments, the National Cable

Television Association (‘‘NCTA’’)

acknowledged that:

The benefits [of the Commission’s current

pole attachment regulatory regime] are most

vivid in the case of small cable operators.

Small operators are peculiarly vulnerable to

pole rent overcharges, because of the nature

of their service areas. The Commission has

recognized that small systems serve areas

that are far less densely populated areas than

the areas served by large operators. A small

rural operator might serve half of the homes

along a road with only 20 homes per mile,

but might need 30 poles to reach those 10

subscribers. A pole rent increase creates an

enormous push on [cable] rates, and

frequently makes rural line extensions

uneconomical. These same small operators

are often the very parties without the budgets

to litigate expensive document-intensive rate

cases.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31277

The NCTA’s comments recognize that

the Commission’s chosen methodology

does not excessively burden small

businesses.

3. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which

Rules Will Apply

48. The RFA generally defines a

‘‘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 that:

(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’’). For many of the entities

described below, the SBA has defined

small business categories through

Standard Industrial Classification

(‘‘SIC’’) codes.

a. Utilities

49. Many of the decisions and rules

adopted herein may have a significant

effect on a substantial number of utility

companies. Section 224 defines a

‘‘utility’’ as ‘‘any person who is a local

exchange carrier or an electric, gas,

water, steam, or other public utility, and

who owns or controls poles, ducts,

conduits, or rights-of-way used, in

whole or in part, for any wire

communications. Such term does not

include any railroad, any person who is

cooperatively organized, or any person

owned by the Federal Government or

any State.’’ The SBA has provided the

Commission with a list of utility firms

which may be effected by this

rulemaking. Based upon the SBA’s list,

the Commission concludes that all of

the following types of utility firms may

be affected by the Commission’s

implementation of section 224.

(1) Electric Utilities (SIC 4911, 4931 &

4939)

50. Electric Services (SIC 4911). The

SBA has developed a definition for

small electric utility firms. The Census

Bureau reports that a total of 1379

electric utilities were in operation for at

least one year at the end of 1992.

According to SBA, a small electric

utility is an entity whose gross revenues

did not exceed five million dollars in

1992. The Census Bureau reports that

447 of the 1379 firms listed had total

revenues below five million dollars.

51. Electric and Other Services

Combined (SIC 4931). The SBA has

classified this entity as a utility whose

business is less than 95% electric in

combination with some other type of

service. The Census Bureau reports that

a total of 135 such firms were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. The SBA’s definition of a small

electric and other services combined

utility is a firm whose gross revenues

did not exceed five million dollars in

1992. The Census Bureau reported that

45 of the 135 firms listed had total

revenues below five million dollars.

52. Combination Utilities, Not

Elsewhere Classified (SIC 4939). The

SBA defines this utility as providing a

combination of electric, gas, and other

services which are not otherwise

classified. The Census Bureau reports

that a total of 79 such utilities were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small combination utility is a firm

whose gross revenues did not exceed

five million dollars in 1992. The Census

Bureau reported that 63 of the 79 firms

listed had total revenues below five

million dollars.

(2) Gas Production and Distribution (SIC

4922, 4923, 4924, 4925 & 4932)

53. Natural Gas Transmission (SIC

4922). The SBA’s definition of a natural

gas transmitter is an entity that is

engaged in the transmission and storage

of natural gas. The Census Bureau

reports that a total of 144 such firms

were in operation for at least one year

at the end of 1992. According to SBA’s

definition, a small natural gas

transmitter is an entity whose gross

revenues did not exceed five million

dollars in 1992. The Census Bureau

reported that 70 of the 144 firms listed

had total revenues below five million

dollars.

54. Natural Gas Transmission and

Distribution (SIC 4923). The SBA has

classified this entity as a utility that

transmits and distributes natural gas for

sale. The Census Bureau reports that a

total of 126 such entities were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. The SBA’s definition of a small

natural gas transmitter and distributor is

a firm whose gross revenues did not

exceed five million dollars. The Census

Bureau reported that 43 of the 126 firms

listed had total revenues below five

million dollars.

55. Natural Gas Distribution (SIC

4924). The SBA defines a natural gas

distributor as an entity that distributes

natural gas for sale. The Census Bureau

reports that a total of 478 such firms

were in operation for at least one year

at the end of 1992. According to the

SBA, a small natural gas distributor is

an entity whose gross revenues did not

exceed five million dollars in 1992. The

Census Bureau reported that 267 of the

478 firms listed had total revenues

below five million dollars.

56. Mixed, Manufactured, or

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Production

and/or Distribution (SIC 4925). The SBA

has classified this entity as a utility that

engages in the manufacturing and/or

distribution of the sale of gas. These

mixtures may include natural gas. The

Census Bureau reports that a total of 43

such firms were in operation for at least

one year at the end of 1992. The SBA’s

definition of a small mixed,

manufactured or liquefied petroleum

gas producer or distributor is a firm

whose gross revenues did not exceed

five million dollars in 1992. The Census

Bureau reported that 31 of the 43 firms

listed had total revenues below five

million dollars.

57. Gas and Other Services Combined

(SIC 4932). The SBA has classified this

entity as a gas company whose business

is less than 95% gas, in combination

with other services. The Census Bureau

reports that a total of 43 such firms were

in operation for at least one year at the

end of 1992. According to the SBA, a

small gas and other services combined

utility is a firm whose gross revenues

did not exceed five million dollars in

1992. The Census Bureau reported that

24 of the 43 firms listed had total

revenues below five million dollars.

(3) Water Supply (SIC 4941)

58. The SBA defines a water utility as

a firm who distributes and sells water

for domestic, commercial and industrial

use. The Census Bureau reports that a

total of 3,169 water utilities were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small water utility is a firm whose

gross revenues did not exceed five

million dollars in 1992. The Census

Bureau reported that 3065 of the 3169

firms listed had total revenues below

five million dollars.

(4) Sanitary Systems (SIC 4952, 4953 &

4959)

59. Sewerage Systems (SIC 4952). The

SBA defines a sewage firm as a utility

whose business is the collection and

disposal of waste using sewage systems.

The Census Bureau reports that a total

of 410 such firms were in operation for

at least one year at the end of 1992.

According to SBA’s definition, a small

sewerage system is a firm whose gross

revenues did not exceed five million

dollars. The Census Bureau reported

that 369 of the 410 firms listed had total

revenues below five million dollars.

60. Refuse Systems (SIC 4953). The

SBA defines a firm in the business of

refuse as an establishment whose

31278 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

business is the collection and disposal

of refuse ‘‘by processing or destruction

or in the operation of incinerators, waste

treatment plants, landfills, or other sites

for disposal of such materials.’’ The

Census Bureau reports that a total of

2287 such firms were in operation for at

least one year at the end of 1992.

According to SBA’s definition, a small

refuse system is a firm whose gross

revenues did not exceed six million

dollars. The Census Bureau reported

that 1908 of the 2287 firms listed had

total revenues below six million dollars.

61. Sanitary Services, Not Elsewhere

Classified (SIC 4959). The SBA defines

these firms as engaged in sanitary

services. The Census Bureau reports that

a total of 1214 such firms were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small sanitary service firms gross

revenues did not exceed five million

dollars. The Census Bureau reported

that 1173 of the 1214 firms listed had

total revenues below five million

dollars.

(5) Steam and Air Conditioning Supply

(SIC 4961)

62. The SBA defines a steam and air

conditioning supply utility as a firm

who produces and/or sells steam and

heated or cooled air. The Census Bureau

reports that a total of 55 such firms were

in operation for at least one year at the

end of 1992. According to SBA’s

definition, a steam and air conditioning

supply utility is a firm whose gross

revenues did not exceed nine million

dollars. The Census Bureau reported

that 30 of the 55 firms listed had total

revenues below nine million dollars.

(6) Irrigation Systems (SIC 4971)

63. The SBA defines irrigation

systems as firms who operate water

supply systems for the purpose of

irrigation. The Census Bureau reports

that a total of 297 firms were in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small irrigation service is a firm whose

gross revenues did not exceed five

million dollars. The Census Bureau

reported that 286 of the 297 firms listed

had total revenues below five million

dollars.

b. Telephone Companies (SIC 4813)

64. Many of the decisions and rules

adopted herein may have a significant

effect on a substantial number of small

telephone companies. The SBA has

defined a small business for SIC code

4813 (Telephone Communications,

except Radiotelephone) to be a small

entity when it has no more than 1500

employees. The Census Bureau reports

that, at the end of 1992, there were 3497

firms engaged in providing telephone

services, as defined therein, for at least

one year. This number contains a

variety of different categories of carriers,

including local exchange carriers

(‘‘LECs’’), interexchange carriers

(‘‘IXCs’’), competitive access providers

(‘‘CAPs’’), cellular carriers, mobile

service carriers, operator service

providers, pay telephone operators,

personal communications service

(‘‘PCS’’) providers, covered SMR

providers and resellers. Some of those

3497 telephone service firms may not

qualify as small entities or small

incumbent LECs because they are not

‘‘independently owned and operated.’’

We therefore conclude that fewer than

3497 telephone service firms are small

entity telephone service firms or small

incumbent LECs that may be affected by

the Report and Order. Below, we

estimate the potential number of small

entity telephone service firms or small

incumbent LEC’s that may be affected

by the rules adopted herein in this

service category.

(1) Wireline Carriers and Service

Providers

65. The SBA has developed a

definition of small entities for telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone (wireless) companies.

The Census Bureau reports that, there

were 2321 such telephone companies in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small business telephone company

other than a radiotelephone company is

one employing no more than 1500

persons. Of the 2321 nonradiotelephone companies listed by the

Census Bureau, 2295 were reported to

have fewer than 1000 employees. Thus,

at least 2295 non-radiotelephone

companies that might qualify as small

entities or small incumbent LECs, or

small entities based on these

employment statistics. Although some

of these carriers are likely not

independently owned and operated, we

are unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of wireline

carriers and service providers that

would qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 2295 small entity telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone companies that may be

affected by the decisions or rules

adopted in the Report and Order.

(2) Local Exchange Carriers

66. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

providers of local exchange services.

The closest applicable definition under

SBA rules is for telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone (wireless) companies

(SIC 4813). The most reliable source of

information regarding the number of

LECs nationwide appears to be the data

that the Commission publishes annually

in its Telecommunications Industry

Revenue report, regarding the

Telecommunications Relay Service

(‘‘TRS’’). According to ‘‘TRS

Worksheet’’ data released in November

1997, there are 1371 companies

reporting that they categorize

themselves as LECs. Although some of

these carriers are likely not

independently owned and operated, or

have more than 1500 employees, we are

unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of LECs

that would qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 1371 small incumbent LECs

that may be affected by the rules

adopted herein.

(3) Interexchange Carriers

67. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to

providers of interexchange services. The

closest applicable definition under SBA

rules is for telephone communications

companies other than radiotelephone

(wireless) companies (SIC 4813). The

most reliable source of information

regarding the number of IXCs

nationwide of which we are aware

appears to be the data that we collect

annually in connection with TRS.

According to our most recent data, 143

companies reported that they were

engaged in the provision of

interexchange services. Although some

of these carriers are likely not

independently owned and operated, or

have more than 1500 employees, we are

unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of IXCs

that would qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 143 small entity IXCs that

may be affected by the decisions and

rules adopted in the Report and Order.

(4) Competitive Access Providers

68. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to

providers of competitive access services.

The closest applicable definition under

SBA rules is for telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone (wireless) companies

(SIC 4813). The most reliable source of

information regarding the number of

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31279

CAPs nationwide of which we are aware

appears to be the data that we collect

annually in connection with the TRS

Worksheet. According to our most

recent data, 109 companies reported

that they were engaged in the provision

of competitive access services. Although

some of these carriers are likely not

independently owned and operated, or

have more than 1500 employees, we are

unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of CAPs

that would qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 109 small entity CAPs that

may be affected by the decisions and

rules adopted herein.

(5) Cellular Service Carriers

69. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to

providers of cellular services. The

closest applicable definition under SBA

rules is for telephone communications

companies other than radiotelephone

(wireless) companies (SIC 4812). The

most reliable source of information

regarding the number of cellular service

carriers nationwide of which we are

aware appears to be the data that we

collect annually in connection with the

TRS Worksheet. The TRS Worksheet

places cellular licensees and Personal

Communications Service (‘‘PCS’’)

licensees in one group. According to the

most recent data, there are 804 carriers

reporting that they categorize

themselves as either PCS or cellular

carriers. Although it seems certain that

some of these carriers are not

independently owned and operated, or

have more than 1500 employees, we are

unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of cellular

service carriers that would qualify as

small business concerns under SBA’s

definition. Consequently, we estimate

that there are fewer than 804 small

entity cellular service carriers that may

be affected by the decisions and rules

adopted in the Report and Order.

(6) Mobile Service Carriers

70. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to mobile

service carriers, such as paging

companies. The closest applicable

definition under SBA rules is for

telephone communications companies

other than radiotelephone (wireless)

companies (SIC 4813). The most reliable

source of information regarding the

number of mobile service carriers

nationwide of which we are aware

appears to be the data that we collect

annually in connection with the TRS

Worksheet. According to our most

recent data, 172 companies reported

that they were engaged in the provision

of mobile services. Although it seems

certain that some of these carriers are

not independently owned and operated,

or have more than 1500 employees, we

are unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of mobile

service carriers that would qualify

under SBA’s definition. Consequently,

we estimate that there are fewer than

172 small entity mobile service carriers

that may be affected by the decisions

and rules adopted in the Report and

Order.

(7) Broadband Personal

Communications Services (‘‘PCS’’)

Licensees

71. The broadband PCS spectrum is

divided into six frequency blocks

designated A through F, and the

Commission has held auctions for each

block. The Commission has defined

‘‘small entity’’ for Blocks C and F as an

entity that has average gross revenues of

less than $40 million in the three

previous calendar years. For Block F, an

additional classification for ‘‘very small

business’’ was added and is defined as

an entity that, together with their

affiliates, has average gross revenues of

not more than $15 million for the

preceding three calendar years. These

regulations defining ‘‘small entity’’ in

the context of broadband PCS auctions

has been approved by the SBA. No

small businesses within the SBAapproved definition bid successfully for

licenses in Blocks A and B. There were

90 winning bidders that qualified as

small entities in the Block C auction. A

total of 93 small and very small business

bidders won approximately 40% of the

1479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F.

However, licenses for blocks C through

F have not been awarded fully, therefore

there are few, if any, small businesses

currently providing PCS services. Based

on this information, we conclude that

the number of broadband PCS licensees

will include the 90 winning C Block

bidders and the 93 qualifying bidders in

the D, E, and F blocks, for a total of 183

small PCS providers as defined by the

SBA and the Commission’s auction

rules. We note that the TRS Worksheet

data track PCS licensees in the reporting

category ‘‘Cellular or Personal

Communications Service Carrier.’’ As

noted supra in the paragraph regarding

cellular carriers, according to the most

recent data, there are 804 carriers

reporting that they place themselves in

this category.

(8) Specialized Mobile Radio (‘‘SMR’’)

Licensees

72. Pursuant to 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1)

and 90.912(b)(1), the Commission has

defined small entity in auctions for

geographic area 800 MHz and 900 MHz

SMR licenses as a firm that had average

annual gross revenues of less than $15

million in the three previous calendar

years. This definition of a small entity

in the context of 800 MHz and 900 MHz

SMR has been approved by the SBA.

The rules adopted in the Report and

Order may apply to SMR providers in

the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands that

either hold geographic area licenses or

have obtained extended implementation

authorizations. We do not know how

many firms provide 800 MHz or 900

MHz geographic area SMR service

pursuant to extended implementation

authorizations, nor how many of these

providers have annual revenues of less

than $15 million. We assume, for

purposes of this FRFA, that all of the

extended implementation

authorizations may be held by small

entities which may be affected by the

decisions and rules adopted in the

Report and Order. We note that the TRS

Worksheet data track SMR licensees in

the reporting category ‘‘Paging and

Other Mobile Carriers.’’ According to

the most recent data, there are 172

carriers, including SMR carriers,

reporting that they place themselves in

this category.

73. In April 1997, the Commission

held auctions for geographic area

licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band.

There were 60 winning bidders that

qualified as small entities in the 900

MHz auction. Based on this information,

we conclude that the number of 900

MHz geographic area SMR licensees

affected by the rules adopted in the

Report and Order includes these 60

small entities. In December 1997, the

Commission also held auctions for the

525 licenses for the upper 200 channels

in the 800 MHz SMR band. There were

10 winning bidders that qualified as

small entities in that auction. Based on

this information, we conclude that the

number of geographic area SMR

licensees that may be affected by the

rules adopted in the Report and Order

also includes these 10 small entities.

However, the Commission has not yet

determined how many licenses will be

awarded for the lower 230 channels in

the 800 MHz geographic area SMR

auction. There is no basis, moreover, on

which to estimate how many small

entities will win these licenses. Given

that nearly all radiotelephone

companies have fewer than 1000

employees and that no reliable estimate

31280 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

of the number of prospective 800 MHz

licensees for the lower 230 channels can

be made, we conclude, for purposes of

this FRFA, that some or all of the

licenses could conceivably be awarded

to small entities that may be affected by

the decisions and rules adopted in the

Report and Order.

(9) Resellers

74. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to

resellers. The closest applicable

definition under SBA rules is for all

telephone communications companies

(SIC 4812 and 4813). The most reliable

source of information regarding the

number of resellers nationwide of which

we are aware appears to be the data that

we collect annually in connection with

the TRS Worksheet. According to our

most recent data, 339 companies

reported that they were engaged in the

resale of telephone services. Although it

seems certain that some of these carriers

are not independently owned and

operated, or have more than 1500

employees, we are unable at this time to

estimate with greater precision the

number of resellers that would qualify

as small business concerns under SBA’s

definition. Consequently, we estimate

that there are fewer than 339 small

entity resellers that may be affected by

the decisions and rules adopted in the

Report and Order.

c. Wireless (Radiotelephone) Carriers

(SIC 4812)

75. Pursuant to the terms of the 1996

Act, wireless carriers are entitled to affix

their equipment to utility poles with

rates consistent with the Commission’s

rules discussed herein. SBA has

developed a definition of small entities

for radiotelephone (wireless)

companies. The Census Bureau reports

that there were 1176 such companies in

operation for at least one year at the end

of 1992. According to SBA’s definition,

a small business radiotelephone

company is one employing no more

than 1500 persons. The Census Bureau

also reported that 1164 of those

radiotelephone companies had fewer

than 1000 employees. Thus, even if all

of the remaining 12 companies had

more than 1500 employees, there would

still be 1164 radiotelephone companies

that might qualify as small entities if

they are independently owned and

operated. Although some of these

carriers are likely not independently

owned and operated, we are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of radiotelephone

carriers and service providers that

would qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 1164 small entity

radiotelephone companies that may be

affected by the rules adopted herein.

d. Cable System Operators (SIC 4841)

76. The SBA has developed a

definition of small entities for cable and

other pay television services, which

includes all such companies generating

less than $11 million in revenue

annually. This definition includes cable

systems operators, closed circuit

television services, direct broadcast

satellite services, multipoint

distribution systems, satellite master

antenna systems and subscription

television services. According to the

Census Bureau, there were 1423 such

cable and other pay television services

generating less than $11 million in

revenue.

77. The Commission has developed

its own definition of a small cable

system operator for the purposes of rate

regulation. Under the Commission’s

rules, a ‘‘small cable company,’’ is one

serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers

nationwide. Based on our most recent

information, we estimate that there were

1439 cable systems that qualified as

small cable system operators at the end

of 1995. Since then, some of those

companies may have grown to serve

over 400,000 subscribers, and others

may have been involved in transactions

that caused them to be combined with

other cable systems. Consequently, we

estimate that there are fewer than 1439

small entity cable system operators that

may be affected by the decisions and

rules adopted in the Report and Order.

78. The Communications Act also

contains a definition of a small cable

system operator, which is ‘‘a cable

operator that, directly or through an

affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer

than one percent of all subscribers in

the United States and is not affiliated

with any entity or entities whose gross

annual revenues in the aggregate exceed

$250,000,000.’’ The Commission found

that an operator serving fewer than

617,000 subscribers shall be deemed a

small operator, if its annual revenues,

when combined with the total annual

revenues of all of its affiliates, do not

exceed $250 million in the aggregate.

Based on available data, we find that the

number of cable systems serving

617,000 subscribers or less totals 1450.

Although it seems certain that some of

these cable system operators are

affiliated with entities whose gross

annual revenues exceed $250,000,000,

we are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

cable system operators that would

qualify as small cable systems under the

definition in the Communications Act.

e. Municipalities

79. The term ‘‘small governmental

jurisdiction’’ is defined as ‘‘governments

of * * * districts, with a population of

less than 50,000.’’ There are 85,006

governmental entities in the United

States. This number includes such

entities as states, counties, cities, utility

districts and school districts. We note

that section 224 specifically excludes

any utility which is cooperatively

organized, or any person owned by the

Federal Government or any State. For

this reason, we believe that section 224

will have minimal if any affect upon

small municipalities. Further, there are

18 states and the District of Columbia

that regulate pole attachments pursuant

to section 224(c)(1). Of the 85,006

governmental entities, 38,978 are

counties, cities and towns. The

remainder are primarily utility districts,

school districts, and states. Of the

38,978 counties, cities and towns,

37,566 or 96%, have populations of

fewer than 50,000.

4. Description of Projected Reporting,

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance

Requirements

80. The rules adopted in the Report

and Order may require a change in

certain recordkeeping requirements for

conduit systems. A utility will now

have to maintain specific records

relating to the number of linear meters,

or feet, of conduit for the purpose of

determining the net cost of conduit and

the amount of conduit linear

measurement in which a pole

attachment exists. Although this

requirement affects both large and small

businesses equally, we believe that

through the use of presumptions,

specific accounts and publicly available

data in our methodology, we have

avoided a more extensive regulatory

scheme which might have burdened

small entities. We conclude that our

rules will not disproportionately burden

small entities.

5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and

Significant Alternatives Considered

81. Section 703 of the 1996 Act

amended section 224 in several

important ways to provide access to and

rate regulation for pole attachments by

cable operators and telecommunications

carriers in order that they might

compete in the market place to provide

their respective services. The 1996 Act

established a pole attachment rate

methodology for telecommunications

carriers that would not become effective

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31281

until February 8, 2001. Until that time,

pole attachments by

telecommunications carriers will be

regulated in the same manner as pole

attachment rates for cable operators

under section 224(d). Prior to the 1996

Act, access to pole attachments was

available only to cable operators and

only under their franchise pursuant to

section 621. With the legislative

expansion of access and rate regulation,

small entities have greater opportunity

to develop the infrastructure necessary

to compete in the cable and

telecommunications marketplaces. We

have been mindful to maintain

simplicity whenever possible, and to

provide methodologies consistent with

availability to publicly verifiable data.

In the NPRM, we sought comment to reevaluate the formula methodologies

used or proposed, to update our rules

for accounting used in the formulas, and

to provide a methodology for

determining just and reasonable rates

for pole attachments in conduit.

82. In accordance with the RFA, the

Commission has endeavored to

minimize significant impact on small

entities. To minimize the burden on

utility pole owners, including those that

qualify as small entities, and to promote

certainty and efficiency in determining

the pole attachment rate for cable

operators and telecommunications

carriers, we have maintained our

formula presumptions, including our

one-foot presumption of space occupied

by a pole attachment, and the

presumptive amount of usable space on

a pole. We have adopted a conduit

methodology based on publicly

available data and a half-duct

presumption of capacity occupied by a

pole attachment in a conduit system, to

simplify the process of determining a

just and reasonable pole attachment rate

and to provide certainty for small

entities preparing to enter the

competitive marketplace. We have

formalized the use of part 32 accounting

for LECs. We have consolidated all

formula elements, and accounts

specified for use in the formulas, in this

one document in order to provide ease

of application by all parties.

83. Report to Congress: The

Commission will send a copy of the

Report and Order, including this FRFA,

in a report to be sent to Congress

pursuant to the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). A copy

of the Report and Order and this FRFA

(or summary thereof) will also be

published in the Federal Register, see 5

U.S.C. 604(b), and will be sent to the

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

Analysis

84. The requirements adopted in the

Report and Order have been analyzed

with respect to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (the ‘‘1995 Act’’)

and found to impose modified

information collection requirements on

the public. The Commission, as part of

its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork burdens, invites the general

public to take this opportunity to

comment on the information collection

requirements contained in the Report

and Order, as required by the 1995 Act.

Public comments are due July 17, 2000.

Comments should address: (1) 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; (2) the accuracy of

the Commission’s burden estimates; (3)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information collected; and

(4) 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.

85. As stated above, written

comments by the public on the modified

information collection requirements are

due July 17, 2000. Comments on the

information collections contained

herein should be submitted to Judy

Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 1–C804, 12th Street,

SW, Washington DC 20554, or via the

Internet at jboley@fcc.gov. For

additional information on the

information collection requirements,

contact Judy Boley at 202–418–0214 or

via the Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.

IX. Ordering Clauses

86. Pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 224

and 303(r) of the Communications Act

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,

154(i), 224 and 303(r), the Commission’s

rules are hereby amended as set forth in

the Rule Changes.

87. Section 1.1402 of the

Commission’s rules, as amended in the

Rule Changes, will become effective

June 16, 2000. Sections 1.1404 and

1.1409, as amended in the Rule

Changes, contain information collection

requirements that have not been

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget. The Commission will

publish a document in the Federal

Register announcing the effective date

of these sections.

88. The Commission’s Office of Media

Relations, Reference Operations

Division, SHALL SEND a copy of this

Report and Order, including the Final

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

procedures, Cable television,

Communications common carriers,

Conduit, Pole attachments, Poles,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Telecommunications.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

Rule Changes

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Federal Communications

Commission amends 47 CFR part 1 as

follows:

PART 1—PRACTICE AND

PROCEDURE

1. The authority citation for part 1 is

revised to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),

155, 225, 303(r), 309 and 325(e).

2. Amend § 1.1402 to revise

paragraphs (c), (i), (j) and (l) and add

paragraph (n) to read as follows:

§ 1.1402 Definitions.

* * * * *

(c) With respect to poles, the term

usable space means the space on a

utility pole above the minimum grade

level which can be used for the

attachment of wires, cables, and

associated equipment, and which

includes space occupied by the utility.

With respect to conduit, the term usable

space means capacity within a conduit

system which is available, or which

could, with reasonable effort and

expense, be made available, for the

purpose of installing wires, cable and

associated equipment for

telecommunications or cable services,

and which includes capacity occupied

by the utility.

* * * * *

(i) The term conduit means a structure

containing one or more ducts, usually

placed in the ground, in which cables or

wires may be installed.

(j) The term conduit system means a

collection of one or more conduits

together with their supporting

infrastructure.

* * * * *

(l) With respect to poles, the term

unusable space means the space on a

utility pole below the usable space,

including the amount required to set the

depth of the pole.

* * * * *

31282 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

(n) The term inner-duct means a ductlike raceway smaller than a duct that is

inserted into a duct so that the duct may

carry multiple wires or cables.

3. Amend § 1.1404 to remove

paragraph (k), and redesignate

paragraphs (l), (m), and (n) as (k), (l),

and (m), respectively; and revise

paragraphs (g), (h), and the third

sentence of paragraph (j) to read as

follows:

§ 1.1404 Complaint.

* * * * *

(g) For attachments to poles, where it

is claimed that either a rate is unjust or

unreasonable, or a term or condition is

unjust or unreasonable and examination

of such term or condition requires

review of the associated rate, the

complaint shall provide data and

information in support of said claim.

(1) The data and information shall

include, where applicable:

(i) The gross investment by the utility

for pole lines;

(ii) The investment in crossarms and

other items which do not reflect the cost

of owning and maintaining poles, if

available;

(iii) The depreciation reserve from the

gross pole line investment;

(iv) The depreciation reserve from the

investment in crossarms and other items

which do not reflect the cost of owning

and maintaining poles, if available;

(v) The total number of poles:

(A) Owned; and

(B) Controlled or used by the utility.

If any of these poles are jointly owned,

the complaint shall specify the number

of such jointly owned poles and the

percentage of each joint pole or the

number of equivalent poles owned by

the subject utility;

(vi) The total number of poles which

are the subject of the complaint;

(vii) The number of poles included in

paragraph (g)(i)(vi) of this section that

are controlled or used by the utility

through lease between the utility and

other owner(s), and the annual amounts

paid by the utility for such rental;

(viii) The number of poles included in

paragraph (g)(i)(vi) of this section that

are owned by the utility and that are

leased to other users by the utility, and

the annual amounts paid to the utility

for such rental;

(ix) The annual carrying charges

attributable to the cost of owning a pole.

These charges may be expressed as a

percentage of the net pole investment.

With its pleading, the utility shall file a

copy of the latest decision of the state

regulatory body or state court which

determines the treatment of

accumulated deferred taxes if it is at

issue in the proceeding and shall note

the section which specifically

determines the treatment and amount of

accumulated deferred taxes.

(x) The rate of return authorized for

the utility for intrastate service. With its

pleading, the utility shall file a copy of

the latest decision of the state regulatory

body or state court which establishes

this authorized rate of return if the rate

of return is at issue in the proceeding

and shall note the section which

specifically establishes this authorized

rate and whether the decision is subject

to further proceedings before the state

regulatory body or a court. In the

absence of a state authorized rate of

return, the rate of return set by the

Commission for local exchange carriers

shall be used as a default rate of return;

(xi) The average amount of usable

space per pole for those poles used for

pole attachments (13.5 feet may be in

lieu of actual measurement, but may be

rebutted);

(xii) The average amount of unusable

space per pole for those poles used for

pole attachments (a 24 foot presumption

may be used in lieu of actual

measurement, but the presumption may

be rebutted); and

(xiii) Reimbursements received from

CATV operators and

telecommunications carriers for nonrecurring costs.

(2) Data and information should be

based upon historical or original cost

methodology, insofar as possible. Data

should be derived from ARMIS, FERC 1,

or other reports filed with state or

federal regulatory agencies (identify

source). Calculations made in

connection with these figures should be

provided to the complainant. The

complainant shall also specify any other

information and argument relied upon

to attempt to establish that a rate, term,

or condition is not just and reasonable.

(h) With respect to attachments

within a duct or conduit system, where

it is claimed that either a rate is unjust

or unreasonable, or a term or condition

is unjust or unreasonable and

examination of such term or condition

requires review of the associated rate,

the complaint shall provide data and

information in support of said claim.

(1) The data and information shall

include, where applicable:

(i) The gross investment by the utility

for conduit;

(ii) The accumulated depreciation

from the gross conduit investment;

(iii) The system duct length or system

conduit length and the method used to

determine it;

(iv) The length of the conduit subject

to the complaint;

(v) The number of ducts in the

conduit subject to the complaint;

(vi) The number of inner-ducts in the

duct occupied, if any. If there are no

inner-ducts, the attachment is presumed

to occupy one-half duct.

(vii) The annual carrying charges

attributable to the cost of owning

conduit. These charges may be

expressed as a percentage of the net

linear cost of a conduit. With its

pleading, the utility shall file a copy of

the latest decision of the state regulatory

body or state court which determines

the treatment of accumulated deferred

taxes if it is at issue in the proceeding

and shall note the section which

specifically determines the treatment

and amount of accumulated deferred

taxes.

(viii) The rate of return authorized for

the utility for intrastate service. With its

pleading, the utility shall file a copy of

the latest decision of the state regulatory

body or state court which establishes

this authorized rate of return if the rate

of return is at issue in the proceeding

and shall note the section which

specifically establishes this authorized

rate and whether the decision is subject

to further proceedings before the state

regulatory body or a court. In the

absence of a state authorized rate of

return, the rate of return set by the

Commission for local exchange carriers

shall be used as a default rate of return;

and

(ix) Reimbursements received by

utilities from CATV operators and

telecommunications carriers for nonrecurring costs.

(2) Data and information should be

based upon historical or original cost

methodology, insofar as possible. Data

should be derived from ARMIS, FERC 1,

or other reports filed with state or

federal regulatory agencies (identify

source). Calculations made in

connection with these figures should be

provided to the complainant. The

complainant shall also specify any other

information and argument relied upon

to attempt to establish that a rate, term,

or condition is not just and reasonable.

* * * * *

(j) * * * A utility must supply a cable

television operator or

telecommunications carrier the

information required in paragraph (g),

(h) or (i) of this section, as applicable,

along with the supporting pages from its

ARMIS, FERC Form 1, or other report to

a regulatory body, within 30 days of the

request by the cable television operator

or telecommunications carrier. * * *

* * * * *

4. Amend § 1.1409 by redesignating

paragraph (e)(3) as paragraph (e)(4); and

revise paragraphs (e)(1) and (f), and add

new paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 17, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 31283

§ 1.1409 Commission consideration of the

complaint.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(1) The following formula shall apply

to attachments to poles by cable

operators providing cable services. This

formula shall also apply to attachments

to poles by any telecommunications

carrier (to the extent such carrier is not

a party to a pole attachment agreement)

or cable operator providing

telecommunications services until

February 8, 2001:

Maximum

Rate

Space Occu f

e

Carrying pied by Attachment

Total Usable Space Net Cost o

a Bare Pol Charge Rate = ××

* * * * *

(3) The following formula shall apply

to attachments to conduit by cable

operators providing cable services. This

formula shall also apply to attachments

to conduit by any telecommunications

carrier (to the extent such carrier is not

a party to a pole attachment agreement)

or cable operator providing

telecommunications services until

February 8, 2001:

Maximum 

Rate = 1

Number of Ducts 1 DuctNo. of Inner Ducts of

Ducts Net Conduit Investment

System Duct Length Carrying

Charge Rate

 (Percentage of Conduit Capacity) (Net Linear Cost of a Conduit)

× 



 



 × ×





 



 × No.

If no inner-duct is installed the fraction,

‘‘1 Duct divided by the No. of InnerDucts’’ is presumed to be 1⁄2.

* * * * *

(f) Paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(4) of this

section shall become effective February

8, 2001 (i.e., five years after the effective

date of the Telecommunications Act of

1996). Any increase in the rates for pole

attachments that results from the

adoption of such regulations shall be

phased in over a period of five years

beginning on the effective date of such

regulations in equal annual increments.

The five-year phase-in is to apply to rate

increases only. Rate reductions are to be

implemented immediately. The

determination of any rate increase shall

be based on data currently available at

the time of the calculation of the rate

increase.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–11911 Filed 5–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 600 and 660

[Docket No. 991223347–9347; I.D. 042600B]

Fisheries off West Coast States and in

the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast

Groundfish Fishery; Trip Limit

Adjustments

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Fishing restrictions; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This document clarifies tables

2,3,4, and 5 for Pacific Coast groundfish

species and trip limits that were

published in the Federal Register on

May 4, 2000.

DATES: Effective 0001 hours local time

May 1, 2000 (May 16, 2000 for the ‘‘B’’

platoon), unless modified, superseded

or rescinded, until the effective date of

the 2001 annual specifications and

management measures for the Pacific

Coast groundfish fishery, which will be

published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Katherine King or Yvonne deReynier,

Northwest Region, NMFS, 206–526–

6140.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 4,

2000, at 65 FR 25881, NMFS announced

changes to trip limits in the Pacific

Coast groundfish fishery. Tables 2, 3, 4,

and 5 are being republished in a logical

and readable format.

In Section IV, tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 are

republished as follows:

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F