Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices 45647

Industries, Inc., Commercial 76 Auto

Truck Stop, Cooper & Son, Inc.,

Maritrans Operating Partners L.P., f/k/

a Sonet Marine and Sonat Marine,

Cortez Shell, Inc., Cypress Tire &

Auto Service, D&R Truck Service,

Inc., Daniel Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.,

Dart Container Corporation, De Soto

County Board of County

Commissioners, Dick Smith Motors,

Inc., Dodge City, Inc., Don Olson

Firestone, Dunson Harvesting, Inc.,

East Bay Sanitation, Edward’s

Asphalt, Inc., Ekiert Tire Center,

Ernie’s Amoco Station, Evans

Automotive, F.W. Woolworth, Co.,

Farrell Lines Incorporated/Austral

Patriot, Firestone—M.R. Lambert

Firestone, Flohl’s Service Station,

Florida—Department of Agriculture,

Florida Favorite Fertilizer, Inc.,

Florida Refuse Service, Inc., Florida

West Coast Distributors, Inc., FMC

Corporation, Freeman & Sons, Inc. n/

k/a Brungart Equipment Co., Inc.,

G&B Oil Products, Gadd Concrete,

Inc., Gator Concrete n/k/a Metro

Concrete Co., Gene’s ‘66’ Service,

Goochland Nurseries, Inc., Gray

Enterprises of Tampa, Inc., Green

Acres R.V. Center, Inc., Griffin’s

Concrete, Inc., Growers Service Co.,

Inc., Gulf Coast Lead Company n/k/a

Gulf Coast Recycling, Inc., Hanna

Transfer Company, Hendry County

School Board, Henkels & McCoy

Equipment Co., Inc., Herman’s Auto

Clinic, Hertz Penske Truck Leasing,

Inc., Highland County School District,

Hillsborough County Aviation

Authority, Hunt Refining Company f/

k/a Hunt Oil Company, Hydraulic

Equipment Co., Import City, J.C.

Penney Co., Inc., J.H. Williams Oil

Company, Inc., Jim’s Gulf Station,

John Deere Industrial Equipment Co.,

Johnson’s Chevron, Joie Chitwood

Chevrolet, Inc., Jones Oil & Tire, Inc.,

Kash N’ Karry, Kent Oil Company,

Inc., Kings Point Vehicle Storage

Club, Inc., Krispy Kreme Doughnuts,

Larkin Contracting, Inc., Lee Myles

Associates Corp., Linder Industrial

Machinery, M&M Lawn Mower Sales

and Service, Inc., Macasphalt

Corporation n/k/a Ashland-Warren,

Inc., Masons Concrete of Crystal

River, Inc., McGinnes Lumber

Company at Plant City, McLeods 66

Service, Moran Towing Corp.,

National Guard Amory, Tag-Fl,

National Sea Products (U.S.) Corps.

Ltd., John H. Patterson, On Site Truck

Services, Inc., Orange Co. of Florida,

Inc., Orange State Oil Co., Parcel

Delivery of Tampa, Inc., Parkwood

Auto Service, Paul Bundy Exxon

Station, Peace River Electric

Cooperative, Inc., Pennington Auto

Service Center, Pepsico Truck Leasing

Co., L.P./General Electric Capital Co.,

Plant City Steel Corporation n/k/a

Harsco Corporation, Precision

Automotive Limited, Precision

Toyota, Inc. f/k/a University Toyota,

Inc., Pride Manufacturing Company,

Ram Industries, Inc., Reco-Tricote,

Inc., Richens and Son, Inc., Roberts

Motor Company, Inc., Roundtree

Transport & Rigging, Inc., Roy’s Gulf

Station, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.,

Schwend, Inc., Sorrells Bros. Packing

Co., Inc., South Dale Mabry Exxon

(Britt’s Exxon), South Howard Auto

Service (pre-83), Southland

Industries, Southside Shell Service,

Standard Marine Supply Corp.,

Standard Sand & Silica Company,

Stauffer Chemical Co., Suncoast

Helicopters, Inc., Tampa Maid Sea

Products, Inc., Ullrich’s, Union

Carbide Corporation, Utility Trailer &

Brake Service, Inc., Vassallo, Inc. f/k/

a Forder Vassallo, Inc., Venice Flying

Service, Inc., Virgil’s ‘‘66’’, Inc., West

Trucking Company, Inc., Wilson

Davis Ford, Inc., Winter Garden Citrus

Growers Association, Winter Haven

Citrus Growers Assoc., Woodcook’s

Gulf, and Yarbrough Tire Service, Inc.

EPA will consider public comments

on the proposed settlement for thirty

days. EPA may withdraw from or

modify the proposed settlement should

such comments disclose facts or

considerations which indicate the

proposed settlement is inappropriate,

improper, or inadequate. Copies of the

proposed settlement are available from:

Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IV, Program Services Branch,

Waste Management Division, 61 Forsyth

Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303,

(404) 562–8887.

Written comment may be submitted to

Mr. Greg Armstrong at the above

address within 30 days of the date of

publication.

Dated: August 21, 1997.

Richard D. Green,

Acting Director, Waste Management Division.

[FR Doc. 97–22953 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Public Information Collections

Approved by Office of Management

and Budget

August 21, 1997.

The Federal Communications

Commission (FCC) has received Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

approval for the following public

information collections pursuant to the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub.

L. 104–13. An agency may not conduct

or sponsor and a person is not required

to respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid

control number. For further information

contact Shoko B. Hair, Federal

Communications Commission, (202)

418–1379.

Federal Communications Commission

OMB Control No.: 3060–0742.

Expiration Date: 12/31/99.

Title: Number Portability—47 CFR

Part 52, Subpart C, Sections 52.21–

52.31.

Form No.: N/A.

Respondents: Business or other for

profit.

Estimated Annual Burden: 237

respondents; 4.74 hours per response

(avg.); 1125 total annual burden hours

for all collections.

Estimated Annual Reporting and

Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Description: In the First Memorandum

Opinion and Order on Reconsideration

(First Reconsideration Order) issued in

CC Docket No. 95–116, the Commission

generally affirms and clarifies rules

promulgated in the First Report and

Order issued in this proceeding which

implements the statutory requirement

that local exchange carriers (LECs)

provide number portability as set forth

in Section 251 of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996

Act). The Commission requires the

following information to be collected

from various entities: a. Field Test

report: The First Report and Order

requires carriers participating in a field

test of number portability in the

Chicago, Illinois area to jointly file with

the Commission a report of their

findings within 30 days after

completion of the test. At this time, it

is not clear how many carriers will be

participating, but it is likely to include

several new entrant local exchange

carriers (LECs) and the dominant

incumbent LEC in the region. See 47

CFR Section 52.23(g). (11

respondents=20 hours per

respondent=220 annual burden hours).

b. Requests for long-term number

portability in areas inside or outside the

100 largest MSAs: The First

Memorandum Opinion and Order on

Reconsideration requires that long-term

number portability must be provided by

LECs and CMRS providers inside the

100 largest Metropolitan Statistical

Areas (MSAs) in switches for which

another carrier has made a specific
45648 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices

request for number portability,

according to the Commission’s

deployment schedule. A carrier must

make its specific requests for

deployment of number portability in

particular switches at least nine months

before the deadline for completion of

number portability in that MSA. After

carriers have submitted requests for

number portability, a wireline carrier or

CMRS provider must make readily

available upon request, to any interested

parties, a list of its switches for which

portability has been requested, and

those for which portability has not been

requested. (80 respondents=3 hours per

response=240 total annual hours). States

will have the option of aggregating

switch requests in the 100 largest MSAs.

(50 respondents=3 hours per

response=150 total annual hours). After

the deadline for deployment in an MSA,

carriers must deploy number portability

in additional switches in that MSA

upon request within certain time

frames. After December 31, 1998, for

LECs and after June 30, 1999, for CMRS

providers outside the 100 largest MSAs,

the First Report and Order continues to

require deployment within six months

after a specific request by another

telecommunications carrier. The request

must specifically request long-term

number portability, identify the area

covered by the request, and provide a

tentative date six or more months in the

future when the carrier expects to need

number portability in order to port

prospective customers. See 47 CFR

Sections 52.23(b) and 52.31(a). (80

respondents×3 hours per response=240

hours). c. State notification of intention

to ‘‘opt out’’ of regional database system:

The First Report and Order requires

state regulatory commissions to file with

the Commission a notification if they

opt to develop a state-specific database

for the provision of number portability

in lieu of participating in a regional

database system. See 47 CFR Section

52.25(g). ( 5 respondents×3 hours=15

annual hours). d. Carrier petitions

challenging state decision to ‘‘opt out’’

of regional database system: The First

Report and Order permits carriers to

challenge decisions made by states to

develop a state-specific number

portability database in lieu of

participating in the regional databases

by filing a petition with the

Commission. Such carrier petitions

must demonstrate that the state decision

to opt out would significantly delay

deployment of permanent number

portability or result in excessive costs to

carriers. See 47 CFR Section 52.25(g). (2

respondents×10 hours=20 hours). e.

Proposal to administer database(s): The

item requires any administrator selected

by a state prior to the release of the First

Report and Order, that wishes to bid for

administration of one of the regional

databases, must submit a new proposal

in accordance with the guidelines

established by the NANC. See 1st Report

and Order, paragraph 97. (1

respondent=160 hours=160 annual

hours). f. Petitions to extend

implementation deadline: The First

Report and Order requires carriers that

are unable to meet the deadlines for

implementing a long-term number

portability solution to file with the

Commission at least 60 days in advance

of the deadline a petition to extend the

time by which implementation in its

network will be completed. See 47 CFR

Sections 52.23(3) and 52.31(d). (8

respondents×10 hours=80 annual

hours). The information collected by the

Commission under the field test report

requirement will be used by the

Commission to evaluate the

implementation of long-term number

portability measures and to safeguard

the reliability of the public switched

network. The specific request

requirements will serve to trigger the

obligation of LECs to provide long-term

number portability. The requirement

that states notify the Commission of

their intention to opt out of the regional

database system will assist the

Commission in monitoring the

nationwide implementation of number

portability. The option for states to

aggregate switch requests in the top 100

MSAs will also enable the states and

Commission to monitor nationwide

implementation. The requirement that

any administrator selected prior to the

First Report and Order’s release must

submit a new proposal to administer

other databases ensures that such

proposals conform with the

requirements specified by the NANC,

consistent with the principles

enunciated by the Commission in the

First Report and Order. Petitions to

extend implementation deadlines will

be used by the Commission to

determine whether circumstances exist

which warrant extension of any of the

deadlines announced by the

Commission in the First Report and

Order. The list of switches for which

portability has been requested as

required by the First Memorandum

Opinion and Order on Reconsideration

in the top 100 MSAs will enable the

Commission, states and carriers to

monitor implementation of nationwide

number portability. You are required to

respond.

OMB Control No.: 3060–0777.

Expiration Date: 08/31/2000.

Title: Access Charge Reform—CC

Docket No. 92–262 (Further Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking).

Form No.: N/A.

Respondents: Business or other for

profit.

Estimated Annual Burden: 26

respondents; 360 hours per response

(avg.); 9360 total annual burden hours

for all collections.

Estimated Annual Reporting and

Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $289,000.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Description: In the Further Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) issued

in CC Docket No. 263, Access Charge

Reform, the FCC proposes to make

changes in the allocation of price cap

LECs’ interstate costs between regulated

interstate services and nonregulated

billing and collection activities. The

Commission proposes collection of

information under the following

regulatory framework. a. General

Purpose Computer Assets Study: Under

this proposal, a price cap LEC would

study the uses of the general purpose

computer assets recorded in Account

2124 to determine the percentage of

investment in that account that is used

for billing collection activities. That

percentage multiplied by the ratio of the

dollar amount in Account 2124 to the

dollar amount in Account 2110, which

accumulates the total General Support

Facilities (GSF) investment, would be

applied to the interstate portion of

Account 2110 to determine a dollar

amount that represents general purpose

computer assets used for interstate

billing and collection category. The

remainder of the interstate portion of

Account 2110 shall be apportioned

among the access elements and the

interexchange category using the current

investment allocator. General purpose

computer expenses recorded in Account

6124 would be treated in a similar

fashion to Account 2124. The interstate

portion of Account 6124 would be

allocated between (a) the billing and

collection category and (b) all other

elements and categories using the

percentage derived for Account 2124.

The remainder of Account 6120 (GSF

expense) would be apportioned based

on current GSF allocators. Appropriate

downward exogenous cost adjustments

would be made to all price cap baskets.

We recognize that there are costs

attached to a special study approach. To

remedy this concern, we propose that

each price cap LEC add to its cost

allocation manual (CAM) a new section

entitled ‘‘Interstate Billing and

Collection.’’ That section would

describe: (1) the manner in which the

price cap LEC provides interstate billing

and collection services, and (2) the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices 45649

study it uses to determine the portion of

Account 2124 investment that it

attributes to the billing and collection

category. The special study would then

be subject to the same independent

audit requirements as other regulated

and nonregulated cost allocations. In

addition, to obtain an independent

certification of the validity of the

procedures adopted by the price cap

LEC, we would instruct the independent

auditors to examine the design and

execution of the study during the first

independent audit following the

addition of the billing and collection

section to the CAM and to report their

conclusions on the validity of the study.

We also note, that price cap LECs may

already be required to study the use of

computer investment in Account 2124

as part of the process of allocating that

investment between regulated and

nonregulated activities pursuant to the

Part 64 joint cost rules. (13 respondents

× 700 hours per response = 9100 total

annual hours). b. Tariff Filings: The

FNPRM contains a proposal that may

require the filing of tariffs with the

Commission. The Commission proposes

to permit price cap LECs to assess a

PICC on special access lines to recover

revenues for the common line basket.

The special access PICC would be no

higher than the PICC that an incumbent

LEC could charge of a multi-line

business line. Under our proposal, the

special access PICC would not recover

TIC or marketing expense. Consistent

with our approach to reform the

interstate access charge regime,

however, we tentatively conclude that

the scope of this proceeding should be

limited to incumbent price cap LECs.

(13 respondents × 20 hours per

response=260 hours). Our authority to

collect this information is provided

under 47 U.S.C. §§ 201–205 and 303(r).

The information collected under this

FNPRM would be used by the FCC by

incumbent LECs for use in determining

the proper allocation of general purpose

computer costs to the billing and

collection category. Your response

would be mandatory. Public reporting

burden for the collection of information

is as noted above. Send comments

regarding the burden estimate or any

other aspect of the collections of

information, including suggestions for

reducing the burden to Performance

Evaluation and Records Management,

Washington, D.C. 20554.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22850 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA–1186–DR]

Colorado; Amendment to Notice of a

Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice

of a major disaster for the State of

Colorado (FEMA–1186–DR), dated

August 1, 1997, and related

determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 12, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Madge Dale, Response and Recovery

Directorate, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, Washington, DC

20472, (202) 646–3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is

hereby given that the incident period for

this disaster is closed effective August

12, 1997.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.516, Disaster Assistance.)

Lacy E. Suiter,

Executive Associate Director, Response and

Recovery Directorate.

[FR Doc. 97–22944 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA–1177–DR]

Idaho; Amendment to Notice of a Major

Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice

of a major disaster for the State of Idaho,

(FEMA–1177-DR), dated June 13, 1997,

and related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 11, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Response and Recovery

Directorate, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, Washington, DC

20472, (202) 646–3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice

of a major disaster for the State of Idaho,

is hereby amended to include the

following areas among those areas

determined to have been adversely

affected by the catastrophe declared a

major disaster by the President in his

declaration of June 13, 1997: The county

of Bonneville for Individual Assistance

(already designated for Public

Assistance).

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.516, Disaster Assistance.)

Dennis H. Kwiatkowski,

Deputy Associate Director, Response and

Recovery Directorate.

[FR Doc. 97–22945 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS97–1]

Appraisal Subcommittee; Rules of

Operation; Amendment

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee,

Federal Financial Institutions

Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of amended expedited

vote procedures.

SUMMARY: The Appraisal Subcommittee

(‘‘ASC’’) of the Federal Financial

Institutions Examination Council is

amending Section 3.13 of its Rules of

Operation, which governs the

transaction of business by circulation of

written items, i.e., by notation vote. As

amended, the Section will allow each

ASC member to vote in one of three

ways: to approve, to disapprove or to

veto. A vote to veto will require the

issue to be placed on the agenda for the

next scheduled ASC meeting. If a veto

is not exercised, a majority will decide

the matter, provided a quorum of ASC

members participates in the voting

process. In general, the Section

previously required unanimous

approval by all ASC members. A single

member’s ‘‘no’’ vote or failure to vote

within a reasonable time operated as a

veto.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Immediately.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ben Henson, Executive Director, or

Marc L. Weinberg, General Counsel, at

(202) 634–6520, via Internet e-mail at

benh1@asc.gov and marcw1@asc.gov,

respectively, or by U.S. Mail at

Appraisal Subcommittee, 2100

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 200,

Washington, D.C. 20037.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ASC,

on May 29, 1991, adopted Rules of

Operation, which were published at 56

FR 28561 (June 21, 1991). The Rules of

Operation describe, among other things,

the organization of ASC meetings,

notice requirements for meetings,

quorum requirements and certain

practices regarding the disclosure of

information. The ASC, at its August 13,

1997 meeting, approved a total,

substantive revision of Section 3.13 of

the Rules of Operation, which deals

with notation voting.