Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 147 / Tuesday, August 1, 2006 / Notices 43481 

collection of information on the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) comments should be 

submitted on or before October 2, 2006. 

If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) comments to 

Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1–

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

DC 20554 or via the Internet to 

Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information or copies of the 

information collection(s), contact Cathy 

Williams at (202) 418–2918 or via the 

Internet at Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0716. 

Title: Sections 73.88, 73.318 and 

73.685, Blanketing Interference. 

Form Number: Not applicable. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities; Not-for-profit 

institutions. 

Number of Respondents: 21,000. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 1–2 

hours. 

Frequency of Response: Third party 

disclosure requirement. 

Total Annual Burden: 41,000 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: None. 

Privacy Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 73.88(AM) 

states that the licensee of each broadcast 

station is required to satisfy all 

reasonable complaints of blanketing 

interference within the 1 V/m contour. 

47 CFR Section 73.318(b)(FM) states 

that after January 1, 1985, permittees or 

licensees who either (1) commence 

program tests, (2) replace the antennas, 

or (3) request facilities modifications 

and are issued a new construction 

permit must satisfy all complaints of 

blanketing interference which are 

received by the station during a one year 

period. 

47 CFR 73.318(c)(FM) states that a 

permittee collocating with one or more 

existing stations and beginning program 

tests on or after January 1, 1985, must 

assume full financial responsibility for 

remedying new complaints of 

blanketing interference for a period of 

one year. 

Under 47 CFR 73.88(AM), 

73.318(FM), and 73.685(d)(TV), the 

license is financially responsible for 

resolving complaints of interference 

within one year of program test 

authority when certain conditions are 

met. After the first year, a license is only 

required to provide technical assistance 

to determine the cause of interference. 

The FCC has an outstanding Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in MM 

Docket No. 96–62, In the Matter of 

Amendment of part 73 of the 

Commission’s Rules to More Effectively 

Resolve Broadcast Blanketing 

Interference, Including Interference to 

Consumer Electronics and Other 

Communications Devices. The NPRM 

has proposed to provide detailed 

clarification of the AM, FM, and TV 

licensee’s responsibilities in resolving/ 

eliminating blanketing interference 

caused by their individual stations. The 

NPRM has also proposed to consolidate 

all blanketing interference rules under a 

new section 47 CFR 73.1630, 

‘‘Blanketing Interference.’’ This new 

rule has been designed to facilitate the 

resolution of broadcast interference 

problems and set forth all 

responsibilities of the licensee/ 

permittee of a broadcast station. To date, 

final rules have not been adopted. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E6–12326 Filed 7–31–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meeting; Open 

Commission Meeting, Thursday, 

August 3, 2006 

The Federal Communications 

Commission will hold an Open Meeting 

on the subjects listed below on 

Thursday, August 3, 2006, which is 

scheduled to commence at 9:30 a.m. in 

Room TW–C305, at 445 12th Street, 

SW., Washington, DC. 

Item 

No. Bureau Subject 

1 Wireline Competition ...................................... Title: United Power Line Council’s Petition for Declaratory Ruling Regarding the Classification of Broadband over Power Line Internet Access Service as an Information Service 

(WC Docket No. 06–10). 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order concerning 

the classification of broadband over power line Internet access service. 

Office of Engineering and Technology .......... Title: Amendment of part 15 regarding new requirements and measurement guidelines for 

Access Broadband over Power Line Systems (ET Docket No. 04–104). 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order in response 

to petitions for reconsideration of the rules applicable to Broadband over Power Line 

systems. 

Wireline Telecommunications ........................ Title: Service Rules for the 698–746, 747–762 and 777–792 MHz Bands. 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding possible changes to the rules governing wireless licenses in the 698–746, 747–762, and 

777–792 MHz Bands. 

Open captioning will be provided for 

this event. Other reasonable 

accommodations for people with 

disabilities are available upon request. 

Include a description of the 

accommodation you will need including 

as much detail as you can. Also include 

a way we can contact you if we need 

more information. Make your request as 

early as possible; please allow at least 5 

days advance notice. Last minute 

requests will be accepted, but may be 

impossible to fill. Send an e-mail to: 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–

418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty). 

Additional information concerning 

this meeting may be obtained from 

Audrey Spivack or David Fiske, Office 

of Media Relations, (202) 418–0500; 

TTY 1–888–835–5322. Audio/Video 

coverage of the meeting will be 

broadcast live with open captioning 

over the Internet from the FCC’s Audio/ 

Video Events Web page at http:// 

www.fcc.gov/realaudio. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
43482 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 147 / Tuesday, August 1, 2006 / Notices 

1See 12 U.S.C. 1813(a)(2), 1841(c)(2)(H). 

2 If an ILC is authorized to, and does, in fact, offer 

demand deposits, any company that owns such an 

ILC may be required to register as a bank holding 

company. As a result, most of the ILCs have chosen 

not to offer demand deposits. 

3 12 U.S.C. 1813(a)(2). 

4See 12 U.S.C. 1841(c)(2)(H). 

5 During 2000, 4 new ILCs were insured; 2 during 

each of 2001 and 2002; 5 during 2003; 6 during 

2004; 4 during 2005; and 1 thus far in 2006. The 

insurance date for each institution reflects the date 

the institution began operating. 

For a fee this meeting can be viewed 

live over George Mason University’s 

Capitol Connection. The Capitol 

Connection also will carry the meeting 

live via the Internet. To purchase these 

services call (703) 993–3100 or go to 

http://www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu. 

Copies of materials adopted at this 

meeting can be purchased from the 

FCC’s duplicating contractor, Best Copy 

and Printing, Inc. (202) 488–5300; Fax 

(202) 488–5563; TTY (202) 488–5562. 

These copies are available in paper 

format and alternative media, including 

large print/type; digital disk; and audio 

and video tape. Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc. may be reached by e-mail at 

FCC@BCPIWEB.com. 

Federal Communications Commission 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 06–6641 Filed 7–28–06; 12:31 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

Moratorium on Certain Industrial Loan 

Company Applications and Notices 

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation (FDIC). 

ACTION: Notice; The Imposition of a 

Moratorium. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

imposition of a six-month moratorium 

on FDIC action to accept, approve, or 

deny any application for deposit 

insurance submitted to the FDIC by, or 

on behalf of, any proposed or existing 

industrial loan company, industrial 

bank or similar institution (collectively, 

ILC),1 or accept, disapprove, or issue a 

letter of intent not to disapprove, any 

change in bank control notice submitted 

to the FDIC with respect to any ILC. The 

FDIC Board of Directors (Board) may 

exclude from the moratorium any 

particular application or notice if it 

determines that the moratorium would 

present a significant safety and 

soundness risk to any FDIC-insured 

institution or a significant risk to the 

deposit insurance fund, or failure to act 

would otherwise impair the mission of 

the FDIC. 

DATES: The moratorium is effective 

through Wednesday, January 31, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions regarding the moratorium: 

contact Robert C. Fick, Counsel, (202) 

898–8962; Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation, Washington, DC 20429. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Nature and Brief History of ILCs 

ILCs were first chartered in the early 

1900’s as small loan companies for 

industrial workers. Over time the 

chartering states have gradually 

expanded the powers of their ILCs to the 

extent that ILCs now generally have the 

same powers as state commercial 

banks.2

ILCs are state-chartered banks, and all 

of the existing FDIC-insured ILCs are 

‘‘state nonmember banks’’ under the FDI 

Act. As a result, their primary Federal 

banking supervisor is the FDIC. The 

FDIC generally exercises the same 

supervisory and regulatory powers over 

ILCs that it does over other state nonmember banks. The only material 

exceptions to the FDIC’s authority over 

ILCs are that the cross-guarantee 

liability provisions, the golden 

parachute provisions, and the 

management interlocks provisions are 

not applicable to ILCs, their affiliates or 

holding companies. Legislation to make 

these provisions applicable to ILCs is 

currently pending. 

While ILCs are ‘‘banks’’ under the FDI 

Act,3 they generally are not ‘‘banks’’

under the Bank Holding Company Act 

(BHCA).4 One result of this difference in 

treatment is that a company that owns 

an ILC could engage in commercial 

activities and may not be subject to 

Federal consolidated supervision. By 

contrast, domestic bank holding 

companies and financial holding 

companies that are subject to Federal 

consolidated supervision are prohibited 

from engaging in commercial activities. 

As a result of these differences, some of 

the companies that own ILCs are not 

subject to Federal consolidated 

supervision. The FDIC has noted a 

recent increase in deposit insurance 

applications for, and change in control 

notices with respect to, ILCs that will be 

affiliated with commercial concerns or 

other companies that will not have a 

Federal consolidated supervisor. Some 

members of Congress, the Government 

Accountability Office, the FDIC’s Office 

of Inspector General, and members of 

the public have expressed concerns 

regarding the lack of Federal 

consolidated supervision, the potential 

risks from mixing banking and 

commerce and the potential for an 

unlevel playing field. 

Summary of ILC Portfolio 

The ILC industry has evolved since 

the enactment of the Competitive 

Equality Banking Act (CEBA) in 1987, 

when Congress initially excepted ILCs 

from the BHCA. As of July 24, 2006, 

there were 61 operating insured ILCs; 48 

of the 61 were chartered in Utah or 

California. ILCs also operate in 

Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana, Minnesota 

and Nevada. 

As of year-end 1987, 105 ILCs 

reported aggregate total assets of $4.2 

billion and aggregate total deposits of 

$2.9 billion. The reported total assets for 

these ILCs ranged from $1.0 million to 

$411.9 million, with the average ILC 

reporting $40.0 million in total assets 

and $27.3 million in total deposits. Of 

the current portfolio of 61 ILCs, 14 were 

insured during 1987 or prior years. 

As of year-end 1999, the FDIC insured 

55 ILCs with aggregate total assets of 

$43.6 billion and aggregate total 

deposits of $22.5 billion. The reported 

total assets for these ILCs ranged from 

$2.4 million to $15.6 billion, with 10 

institutions reporting total assets of 

more than $1 billion. The four largest 

institutions reported total assets of $15.6 

billion, $4.4 billion, $3.8 billion, and 

$3.0 billion. Six other institutions 

reported total assets of $1.1 billion to 

$2.5 billion. The remaining portfolio of 

ILCs, on average, reported total assets of 

$152.5 million. Of the current portfolio 

of 61 ILCs, 37 were insured during 1999 

or prior years. 

Since January 1, 2000, 24 ILCs became 

insured.5 As of March 31, 2006, the 61 

insured ILCs reported aggregate total 

assets of $155.1 billion; ILCs owned by 

four financial services firms, including 

Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc.; UBS AG, 

Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.; and 

Morgan Stanley, accounted for 63 

percent of the growth in ILC assets since 

1987. These four firms all operate under 

some form of consolidated supervision 

by the Federal Reserve Board (FRB), the 

Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) or the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(SEC) account for 61.4% of the total ILC 

industry assets as of March 31, 2006. 

Reported total assets of all ILCs, as of 

March 31, 2006, ranged from $2.7 

million to $62.0 billion. ILCs reporting 

total assets of $10 billion or more 

include Merrill Lynch Bank USA ($62.0 

billion), UBS Bank USA ($19.0 billion), 

American Express Centurion Bank 

($13.8 billion), Fremont Investment & 

Loan ($12.9 billion), and Morgan 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES