Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules 52679

those, 659 have fewer than 500

employees and qualify as small entities.

The remaining 57 firms have 500 or

more employees; however, we are

unable to determine how many of those

have fewer than 1,000 employees and

therefore also qualify as small entities

under the SBA definition.

11. This proposal will begin the

process of requiring television

manufacturers to include blocking

technology in their television receivers

and to ensure that any ratings

information that is provided with video

programming is transmitted to the

television receiver intact and without

disruption by any broadcast, cable

television, or other television program

distribution services.

D. Description of Projected Reporting,

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance

Requirements

12. The Commission’s rules require

television receivers to be verified for

compliance with applicable FCC

technical requirements. See 47 CFR

15.101, 15.117, and 2.951, et seq.

Documentation concerning the

verification must be kept by the

manufacturer or importer. The rules

ultimately adopted in this proceeding

will require that television receivers

comply with industry-developed

standards for blocking display of video

programming based on program ratings.

However, verification testing regarding

program blocking is not necessary

because compliance with the industrydeveloped standards, and the associated

Commission rules, can be determined

easily during the television receiver

design process. The Commission may,

of course, ask manufacturers and

importers to document upon occasion

how a particular television receiver

complies with the program blocking

requirements.

E. Significant Alternatives to Proposed

Rules Which Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on Small Entities and

Accomplish Stated Objectives

13. Section 330(c)(4) of the Act directs

the Commission to consider the

existence of appropriate alternative

blocking technologies and to amend its

rules to permit, as an alternative to the

ratings-based approach, use of a

technology that: (1) ‘‘Enables parents to

block programming based on identifying

programs without ratings’’; (2) ‘‘is

available to consumers at a cost which

is comparable’’ to the cost of ratingsbased technology; and (3) ‘‘will allow

parents to block a broad range of

programs on a multichannel system as

effectively and as easily’’ as ratingsbased technology. At this time, we are

not aware of any such alternative

blocking technologies. Accordingly, we

invite comment regarding the existence

of such alternate blocking technologies

and whether it would be appropriate to

permit them at this time in lieu of

ratings-based blocking technology. In

order to evaluate possible alternative

blocking technologies, we solicit

information regarding the cost of any

alternative blocking technology as well

as the cost of implementing ratingsbased technology pursuant to EIA–608.

14. Section 303(x) of the Act makes it

clear that the program blocking

requirements were intended to apply to

any ‘‘apparatus designed to receive

television signals’’ that has a picture

screen of 13 inches or larger. We believe

that the program blocking requirements

we are proposing should apply to any

television receiver (including personal

computers) meeting the screen size

requirements, regardless of whether it is

designed to receive video programming

that is distributed only through cable

television systems, MDS, DBS, or by

some other distribution system.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed

Rules

15. None.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 15

Communications equipment,

Computer technology.

47 CFR Part 73

Communications equipment,

Television.

47 CFR Part 74

Communications equipment,

Television.

47 CFR Part 76

Cable television.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–26700 Filed 10–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AE31

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Reopening of Comment

Period on Proposed Endangered

Status for the Illinois Cave Amphipod

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) provides notice that the

comment period is reopened on the

proposal to list the Illinois cave

amphipod (Gammarus acherondytes) as

endangered, pursuant to Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended. The

Service is reopening the comment

period to allow members of the public

additional time to submit comments on

this proposal.

DATES: The reopened comment period

on the proposal will close on December

8, 1997. Comments must be received by

the Service on or before that date in

order to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials

concerning the proposal should be sent

to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

Ecological Services Field Office, 4469

48th Avenue Court, Rock Island,

Illinois. Comments and materials

received will be available for public

inspection by appointment during

normal business hours at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard C. Nelson, Field Supervisor,

Illinois Field Office (see ADDRESSES

section) (telephone 309/793–5800;

facsimile 309/793–5804).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 28, 1997, the Service

proposed to add the Illinois cave

amphipod (amphipod) to the list of

endangered and threatened animals (62

CFR 40319). The amphipod is

historically known from six

underground cave streams in St. Clair

and Monroe Counties in southwestern

Illinois. Recent searches for the

amphipod indicate that it may exist in

only three cave streams in Monroe

County, all within a 10-mile radius of

Waterloo, Illinois. The cause of the

amphipod’s decline in geographic range

and in the number of populations is

believed to be deteriorating water

quality in the cave streams which it
52680 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules

inhabits. Surface pollutants can readily

enter the cave stream systems by way of

sinkholes that directly connect the land

surface to the underground cave

systems. Agricultural chemicals and

effluent from improperly installed or

maintained residential septic and

sewage systems likely are the primary

pollutants affecting subsurface water

quality and the health of the amphipod.

The comment period for the proposal

ended on September 26, 1997. During

that comment period the Service

received requests for an extension of the

comment period from the Illinois Farm

Bureau Federation, the St. Clair County

Farm Bureau Federation, the Growmark

Corporation, and Congressman Jerry F.

Costello. The Service recognizes that

seasonal agricultural activities may have

made it difficult for some interested and

potentially affected parties to prepare

and submit timely comments on the

proposal. Therefore, the Service is

reopening the comment period for

another 60 days to provide all interested

parties a reasonable opportunity to

submit comments.

Author: The primary author of this

notice is Ronald L. Refsnider, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, Bishop Henry

Whipple Federal Building, 1 Federal

Drive, Ft. Snelling, Minnesota 55111–

4056 (612/725–3536 ext. 241 or fax 612/

725–3526).

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–

625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

Dated: October 1, 1997.

John A. Blankenship,

Assistant Regional Director, Region 3, Ft.

Snelling, Minnesota.

[FR Doc. 97–26791 Filed 10–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P