5160 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1Notice of Office of Management and Budget

Action, at 2 (OMB No. 3060–0701) (released May

30, 1996). OMB suggests a change to § 65.500(b). We

assume this to be a typographical error. ALLTEL,

whose suggestion OMB specifically supports, also

suggests a change to § 65.600(b).

2Notice of Office of Management and Budget

Action, at 2.

bonuses, severance pay, supplemental

unemployment and benefits, vacations

and the opportunity to select work

hours or location of employment.

(g) Reemployment position. (1) An

individual certified by MARAD as being

entitled to reemployment shall be

promptly reemployed by the former

employer, according to the order of

priority specified in 38 U.S.C. 4313(a),

after submitting an application for

reemployment. The three categories of

priority, in ascending order, are for a

merchant seaman who:

(i) Served for 90 days or less;

(ii) Served for more than 90 days; or

(iii) Has a disability incurred in, or

aggravated during, the performance of

such merchant service.

(2) For a person with such service

related disability, the employer shall

make ‘‘reasonable efforts’’, as defined in

38 U.S.C. 4303(10), ‘‘to accommodate

the disability’’ to allow that person to be

employed in the position that would

have been occupied had the

employment with the employer been

continuous, or in the position in which

employed on the date service began as

a merchant seaman, and if that person

is ‘‘not qualified’’ for either position, in

a substantially equivalent position, as

specified in 38 U.S.C. 4313(a)(3) and

(a)(4).

§ 349.6 Enforcement.

MARAD shall provide administrative

assistance to any individual certified to

be entitled to reemployment rights and

benefits pursuant to chapter 43 of title

38, United States Code, made applicable

by 46 App. U.S.C. 1132(a) and these

regulations, who alleges in writing to

MARAD the failure, refusal, or

imminent failure or refusal of an

employer to grant such rights or other

benefits. The complaint must be sent to

MARAD at the address in § 349.3. Such

complaint may be in any format and

shall include the name and address of

the employer against whom the

complaint is filed and a summary of the

allegations that form the basis for the

complaint. MARAD will review,

investigate and attempt to resolve the

complaint by taking one or more of the

following actions:

(a) Consultation with claimant.

MARAD will communicate with the

individual filing the complaint, in

writing and/or by telephone or other

means, to provide assistance in

pursuing reemployment rights and

benefits with the employer.

(b) Employer contact. MARAD may

contact the employer and attempt to

resolve the complaint to the mutual

satisfaction of the complainant and the

employer.

(c) Consultation with Department of

Labor. If attempts by MARAD to resolve

the complaint are unsuccessful,

MARAD may seek advice on the matter

from the U.S. Department of Labor.

(d) Referral to Attorney General or

Merit Systems Protection Board.

MARAD will notify the complainant of

an unsuccessful effort to resolve a

complaint. Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 4323

and 4324, if the complainant so

requests, MARAD will refer to the

Attorney General a complaint relating to

a private or State employer, or to the

Merit Systems Protection Board, for

litigation, a complaint relating to a

Federal executive agency employer.

Dated: January 30, 1997.

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–2746 Filed 2–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 43, 63, 64, and 65

[CC Docket No. 96–23, DA 96–1873]

Revision of Filing Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final Rule.

SUMMARY: On November 8, 1996, the

Common Carrier Bureau adopted a

Report and Order, ‘‘Revision of Filing

Requirements,’’ that eliminates or

significantly reduces reporting

requirements imposed on

communications common carriers by

the Commission’s policies and rules. As

a result of this action, thirteen reporting

requirements have been eliminated, and

the frequency of filing for four other

reports has been reduced.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas J. Beers, Deputy Chief, Industry

Analysis Division, Common Carrier

Bureau, at (202) 418–0952, or Scott

Bergmann, Industry Analysis Division,

Common Carrier Bureau, at (202)

418–7102.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Common Carrier

Bureau’s Report and Order, ‘‘Revision of

Filing Requirements,’’ adopted

November 8, 1996 and released

November 13, 1996 (CC Docket No. 96–

23, DA 96–1873). The full text of the

Report and Order is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street,

Washington, DC 20554. The Report and

Order has been analyzed with respect to

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13, and has been

approved in accordance with the

provisions of that Act (OMB Control No.

3060–0701). The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) offered its strong

support for the actions as proposed. The

complete text also may be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service, Inc.

(202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, NW.,

Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: The actions

taken regarding the collections of

information contained in the Report and

Order have been analyzed with respect

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13, and have been

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) under OMB control

number 3060–0701. OMB offered its

strong support for the actions. In

addition, OMB made three suggestions

in addition to the proposals: (1) That the

word ‘‘annual’’ be added to the revised

language for § 65.600(b) 1 to make clear

that the reports are required on an

annual basis; (2) that the Commission

conduct a rulemaking to address the

filing requirements associated with the

ARMIS and CAM reporting thresholds;

and (3) that the Commission consider

modifying the annual access tariff filing

periods to coincide with the periods

covered by the interstate rate of return

monitoring reports.2 First, we agree with

OMB and ALLTEL that the revised

language for § 65.600(b) should more

clearly specify that reports are required

on an annual basis. We believe that the

revised language for § 65.600(b),

adopted in the Report and Order,

achieves that result. Second, as

discussed at Part IV of the Report and

Order, the Commission will address

ARMIS and CAM filing requirements

and carrier classification in another

proceeding. Finally, we decline to alter

the annual access tariff filing period

because the present schedule allows the

Commission to use the current years

rate-of-return reports to evaluate and

calculate annual access tariffs.

OMB Approval Number: 3060–0701.

Title: Revision of Filing

Requirements, CC Docket 96–23, DA

96–1873.

Form Number: FCC 492.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5161

3Revision of Filing Requirements, Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 96–23, FCC

96–64, (released February 27, 1996), 61 FR 10522

(March 14, 1996). The Commission delegated to the

Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, authority to

determine whether to adopt any of the proposals set

forth in that notice of proposed rulemaking and to

issue any necessary reports or orders arising in that

rulemaking. NPRM at para. 21.

4 Id. at par. 2. While the Commission proposed

modify six reports pursuant to the NPRM, the

Commission’s proposals concerning the Automated

Reporting and Management Information System

(ARMIS) quality of service reports and the

Payphone Compensation reports have been mooted

by the passage of the Telecommunications Act of

1996 and subsequent Commission actions. See 47

U.S. 272(b)(5), 276(b)(1)(A); Revision of Filing

Requirements and Implementation of Section

402(b)(2)(B) of the Telecommunications Act of

1996: Annual ARMIS Reports, Order, CC Docket

No. 96–23, DA 96–381 (released March 20, 1996),

61 FR 18143 (April 24, 1996) (Annual ARMIS

Reports Order); Implementation of the Pay

Telephone Reclassification and Compensation

Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,

Report and Order, CC Docket 96–128, FCC 96–388

(released September 20, 1996), 61 FR 52307

(October 7, 1996) (Payphone Compensation Order).

See also Part IV of the Report and Order.

5NPRM at para. 2.

6NPRM at para. 27.

7 Id.

8Fifteen parties filed comments in this

proceeding. Six of these parties and three additional

parties filed reply comments. Appendix A of the

Report and Order lists the commenters as well as

the short names this Report and Order uses to refer

to them. Additionally, on April 26, 1996, APCC

filed a Request for leave to File Late Reply

Comments, which it further identified as ‘‘Ex Parte

or Late Filed,’’ to reply to issues raised in comments

filed by AT&T and Sprint. We grant APCC’s petition

to the extent that we accept its comments as

informal comments pursuant to § 1.419(b) of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.419(b).

9See, e.g., Pacific Bell Comments at 1–2; NYNEX

Comments at 1; Bellsouth Comments at 1; ALLTEL

Comments at 1; AT&T Comments at 1; GTE

Comments at ii. Other parties directed their

comments to certain proposals contained in the

NPRM. See, e.g., CompTel Comments at 1, n.2

(addressing BOC-filed billing and collection

contracts); NECA Comments at 1 (addressing FCC

Form 492 and pooling reports); INS Comments at

1–2 (addressing, inter alia, semi-annual circuit

reports, but generally ‘‘(applauding) the

Commission’s efforts to reduce unnecessary

regulatory burdens on carriers’ and the

Commission’s scare resources’’).

10See e.g., GTE Comments at ii (endorsing NPRM

proposals and generally urging Bureau to undertake

more comprehensive review of reporting

requirements).

11See Part IV of the Report and Order.

Repondents: Business or other for

profit, including small businesses.

Burden Estimate:

Title Respondents

Est. time per

resp. Frequency Annualburden

1. Circuit Report .......................................................................................... 0 0 hours ............. 0 per year .............. 0 hours.

2. Record Carrier Letter .............................................................................. 0 0 hours ............. 0 per year .............. 0 hours.

3. Report on Inside Wiring Services ........................................................... 0 0 hours ............. 0 per year .............. 0 hours.

4. FCC 492 Rate of Return ......................................................................... 35 8 hours ............. 1 per year .............. 280 hours.

5. New Service Tracking Report ................................................................. 16 20 ..................... ................................ 104 hours.

6. Report of Unsecured Credit to Political Candidates ............................... 13 8 ....................... 1 per year .............. 104 hours.

Total Annual Burden: 488 total hours.

Estimated Costs Per Respondent:

$0.00.

Needs and Uses: The Commission

eliminated thirteen reporting

requirements and reduced the frequency

of four reporting requirements imposed

on communications common carriers,

including Regional Bell Operating

Companies, other local telephone

companies, record carriers, AT&T and

Sprint. The information received will be

used to assist the Federal

Communications Commission in

performing its public oversight duties.

The actions taken regarding the

collection of information subject to the

PRA contained in this Report and Order

have been approved by OMB under

OMB control number 3060–0701. OMB

Control number 3060–0701 expires 5/

31/99.

Summary of the Report and Order

1. In this Report and Order, and

pursuant to delegated authority, we

adopt proposals set out in the

Commission’s Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM), Revision of

Reporting Requirements, to eliminate

thirteen information reporting

requirements imposed on

communications common carriers by

the Commission’s rules and policies.3

We also reduce pursuant to the NPRM,

the frequency of filing obligations for

four other reporting requirements

imposed pursuant to Commission

orders.

2. The Commission in the NPRM

proposed to eliminate thirteen, and

reduce the frequency of filing for six,

information collection requirements

applied to communications common

carriers.4 Earlier, the Commission had

ordered the Common Carrier Bureau

(Bureau) to conduct a review of all

reports filed with the Bureau, including

those reports not subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act.5 In fact, the

NPRM that initiated this proceeding is

but one instance of the Commission’s

on-going commitment to eliminate

unnecessary and burdensome

regulation, including reporting

requirements.6 Other deregulatory

initiatives will follow upon the

Commission’s continuing review of its

statutory mandate and its own practices

and procedures.7

3. In this proceeding, commenters 8

generally support the Commission’s

proposals,9 while several urge the

Commission to go further and delete or

modify reporting requirements other

than those set out in the NPRM.10

Although we in almost all cases deny

these requests as going beyond the

scope of this proceeding, we will take

into account the commenters’

suggestions during our continuing

review.11 Any further action will be

undertaken only after affording

opportunity for comment on discrete

proposals in appropriate proceedings.

4. As a result of this action, the

following reports have been eliminated:

Equal Access Progress Report;

Construction Budget Summary; National

Security and Emergency Preparedness

Effectiveness Report; AT&T Customer

Premises Equipment and Installation

Maintenance Report; AT&T

Nondiscrimination Report for Enhanced

Service Providers; AT&T Service

Quality: Equipment Blockage and

Failure Report; Bell Operating Company

(BOC) Customer Premises Equipment

Installation and Maintenance Report;

BOC Customer Premises Equipment

Affidavits for Nondiscriminatory

Provision of Network Maintenance; BOC

Sales Agency Program and Vendor

Support Program Report; Billing and

Collection Contracts Report; Circuit

Report; Record Carrier Letter; and

Report on Inside Wiring.

5. In addition, the filing frequency for

the following reports has been

significantly reduced: Form 492—Rate

of Return Report (from quarterly to

annual submissions); Joint Board

Monitoring Program—Pooling Report

(from monthly to quarterly

submissions); New Service Tracking

Report (from quarterly to annual

submissions); and Report of Unsecured

Credit to Political Candidates (from

semi-annual annual submissions).
5162 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

12NPRM at para. 22.

13Subtitle II of the CWAAA is ‘‘The Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

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

14See generally Part IV of the Report and Order,

(discussing proposals to revise reports not

discussed in the NPRM); see also Part III of the

Report and Order, (discussing commenters’

proposals to eliminate reports that the Commission

proposed for modification). See, e.g., BellSouth

Comments at 5–6 (urging the Commission to

eliminate ARMIS Reports 43–01, 43–02, and 43–

03).

15See USTA Comments at 1–3; USTA Reply

Comments at 1.

16See 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference

the definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 5

U.S.C.

17 15 U.S.C. 632. See, e.g., Brown Transport

Truckload, Inc. v. Southern Wipers, Inc., 176 B.R.

82, 89 (N.D. Ga. 1994).

18 13 CFR 121.201.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

A. Introduction

1. The Commission in the NPRM

concluded that an Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) mandated in

certain circumstances by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA) was not required

as there were no small entities affected

by the proposals described in the

NPRM.12 After the NPRM was adopted,

however, Congress amended the RFA in

the Contract With America

Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA),

Public Law No. 104–121, 110 Stat. 847

(1996).13 Pursuant to the amended

requirements of the RFA and after

further consideration of the potential

economic impact on small entities, the

Report and Order includes a Final

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)

as set out below.

B. Need for and Objectives of the Rules

and Actions Taken

2. In the Report and Order, the

Common Carrier Bureau (Bureau), upon

delegated authority from the

Commission, eliminates thirteen

reporting requirements and modifies

four others so as to significantly reduce

the frequency by which affected entities

must file information with the

Commission. The Bureau takes these

actions in furtherance of the President’s

Regulatory Reform Initiative and the

overall de-regulatory objectives of the

Paperwork Reduction Act. This action is

part of the Commission’s and Bureau’s

continuing efforts to reduce the

regulatory burden on the public by

reducing the amount of information the

public must provide to the Commission.

In short, the results of the Bureau’s

actions in the Report and Order are

entirely deregulatory and represent

significant reductions of the burdens

imposed on the public—including small

entities. No additional or substitute

burdens are imposed on the public to

replace the reporting requirements that

are eliminated.

C. Summary of Significant Issues Raised

by the Public in Response to the IRFA

3. As explained in paragraph one of

the Report and Order, the Commission

in the NPRM concluded that an IRFA

was not required and, as a result, no

comments were filed addressing such an

analysis. In general, however, the

commenters praised and supported the

Commissions’s proposed deregulatory

actions. In fact, no party opposed any of

the deregulatory actions adopted in the

Report and Order. While not every

partly discussed every action proposed

in the NPRM, the overwhelming

consensus was that the actions taken in

the Report and Order—all of which

serve either to eliminate or reduce filing

burdens imposed by regulation—would

serve the public interest. Some parties

encouraged the Commission to make

additional revisions to reporting

requirements beyond those proposed in

the NPRM.14 Accordingly, we conclude

that nothing in the record demonstrates

that small entities will be adversely

affected by implementation of the

Report and Order. This conclusion is

bolstered by the supportive comments

of USTA, whose members include small

and mid-size companies.15

D. Description and Estimate of Number

of Small Businesses to Which Rules and

Actions Will Apply

4. For purposes of this analysis, we

examined the relevant definition of

‘‘small entity’’ or ‘‘small business’’ and

applied this definition to examine those

entities that are subject to the reporting

requirements in question. The RFA

defines a ‘‘small business’’ to be the

same as a ‘‘small business concern’’

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

632, unless the Commission has

developed one or more definitions that

are appropriate to its activities.16 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) meets any additional criteria

established by the Small Business

Administration (SBA).17 Moreover, SBA

has defined a small business for

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

category 481 (Telephone

Communications) to be small entities

when they have fewer than 1,500

employees.18

5. As an initial matter we note that,

as demonstrated by the following list,

the entities affected by the vast majority

of the deregulatory actions taken by the

Bureau in the Report and Order are

among the largest communications

companies, namely, AT&T, Sprint, the

Regional (Bell) Holding Companies

(RHCs), and the Bell Operating

Companies (BOCs):

(1) Equal Access Progress Report:

submitted by AT&T and RHCs;

(2) Construction Budget Summary:

submitted by AT&T and RHCs;

(3) National Security and Emergency

Preparedness Effectiveness Report

(NSEP Report): submitted annually by

AT&T and Bellcore;

(4) AT&T Customer Premises

Equipment (CPE): Installation &

Maintenance Report;

(5) AT&T Service Quality: Equipment

Blockage and Failure Report;

(6) AT&T Nondiscrimination Report

for Enhanced Service Providers;

(7) BOC Customer Premises

Equipment (CPE) Affidavits for NonDiscrimination Provision of Network

Maintenance;

(8) BOC Customer Premises

Equipment (CPE) Installation &

Maintenance Report;

(9) BOC Sales Agency Program and

Vendor Support Program Report;

(10) Billing and Collection Contracts:

submitted by incumbent local exchange

carriers (ILECs).

(11) Circuit Report: filed by 36

nondominant carriers.

(12) Record Carrier Letter: filed by

record carriers with operating revenues

over $75 million.

(13) Report on Inside Wiring Service:

filed by ILECs with operating revenues

over $100 million;

(14) Form 492 Rate of Return Report:

filed by ILECs not subject to price cap

regulation and the National Exchange

Carrier Association (NECA);

(15) Joint Board Monitoring Program:

Pooling: submitted by NECA;

(16) New Service Tracking Report:

submitted by ILECs subject to price-cap

regulation;

(17) Report of Unsecured Credit to

Political Candidates: submitted by all

carriers having revenue in excess of $1

million.

6. Setting aside the ten actions that

are addressed exclusively to some of the

largest communications entities, only

the adopted actions addressing the

following reports would appear to

possibly implicate some small entities:

(3) NSEP Report; (10) Billing and

Collection; (11) Circuit Report; (12)

Record Carrier Letter; (14) Form 492

Rate of Return Report; (15) Joint Board

Monitoring Program; and (17) Report of

Unsecured Credit to Political

Candidates. Moreover, it is easy to

quantify the number of all entities (i.e.,

including a putative smaller number of

small entities) affected by four of the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5163

19See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

20See, e.g., Expanded Interconnection with Local

Telephone Company Facilities, Supplemental

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 6 FCC Rcd 5809

(1991), 56 FR 52496 (October 21, 1991).

21See, e.g., Implementation of Sections of the

Cable Television Consumer Protection Act of 1992:

Rate Regulation, Sixth Report and Order and

Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, 10 FCC Rcd

7393, 7418 (1995), 60 FR 35854 (July 12, 1995).

22Federal Communications Commission, CCB,

Industry Analysis Division, ‘‘Telecommunications

Industry Revenue: TRS Fund Worksheet Data’’, Tbl.

21 (Average Total Telecommunications Revenue

Reported by Class of Carrier) (February 1996) (TRS

Worksheet).

23SBA has established SIC 4812 to distinguish

small entities providing radiotelephone

communications from SIC 4813 small entities

providing telephone communications except

radiotelephone.

24TRS Worksheet, at Tbl. 21 (Average Total

Telecommunications Revenue Reported by Class of

Carrier).

seven actions not addressed exclusively

to the largest entities. Thus, action (3),

NSEP Report, affects only one entity

other than AT&T (Bellcore); action (11),

Circuit Report, affects only 36 entities;

action (12), Record Carrier Letter, affects

only two entities; and action (15), Joint

Board Monitoring Program, affects only

one entity (NECA). Assuming,

arguendo, that some of these affected

entities are ‘‘small business’’ or ‘‘small

entities,’’ the subset of such putative

small businesses or entities could only,

by definition, equal and not exceed the

forty (40) members that, at a maximum,

constitute the affected entity set for

these four actions. Furthermore, the

regulatory actions adopted in the Report

and Order, in every case, effect

reductions in regulatory burdens: as a

result of the Report and Order, fewer

regulatory burdens are imposed on all

affected entities, large and small alike.

7. Thus, only three of the reportrelated actions adopted in the Report

and Order are addressed to entity

groups for which small business or

entity subsets, per SBA definition, are

difficult to identify and quantify: (10)

Billing and Collection (submitted by all

ILECs); (14) Form 492 Rate of Return

Report (filed by NECA and all ILECs not

subject to price cap regulation); and (17)

Report of Unsecured Credit to Political

Candidates (submitted by all carriers

having revenue in excess of $1 million).

We proceed to consider these entity

groups.

8. First, addressing the groups ‘‘all

ILECs’’ and ‘‘all ILECs not subject to

price cap regulations,’’ we note that

only one action, (10), Billing and

Collection, affects ILECs generally,

while a second, (14) Rate of Return

Report, affects one readily identifiable

entity (NECA) and a subset of ‘‘all

ILECs’’ that excludes the largest ILECs

(i.e., ‘‘all ILECs not subject to price cap

regulation’’). Furthermore, we note that

the Commission has found ILECs to be

‘‘dominant in their field of operation’’

since the early 1980’s, and consistently

has certified under the RFA 19 that

ILECs are not subject to regulatory

flexibility analyses because they are not

small businesses.20 The Commission

has made similar determinations in

other areas.21 We firmly believe that the

Commission’s consistent and longstanding definitional treatment of all

ILECs as dominant (and hence exempt

from treatment as small businesses

under prong (2) of the SBA test set out

supra) should not be altered here. We

will, however, out of an abundance of

caution and prudence, include small

ILECs, as defined in relation to SBA SIC

481, in this FRFA to remove any

possible issue of RFA compliance.

9. 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

ILECs nationwide of which we are

aware appears to be the data that we

collect annually in connection with the

Telecommunications Relay Service

(TRS). According to our most recent

data, 1,347 companies reported that

they were engaged in the provision of

local exchange services.22 Although it

seems certain that some of these carriers

are not independently owned and

operated (prong 1 of the SBA definition

of small business concerns), or have

more than 1,500 employees (prong 3),

we are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

ILECs that would qualify as small

business concerns under SBA’s

definition. Consequently, we estimate

that there are fewer than 1,347 small

ILECs that may be affected by the

actions adopted in the Report and

Order. Again, in every case, these

actions either eliminate or reduce the

regulatory burdens imposed on any

such small ILECs.

10. The final deregulatory action

adopted by the Report and Order poses

the most difficulty in identifying

affected small business concerns.

Number (17), Report of Unsecured

Credit to Political Candidates, must be

submitted by all carriers having revenue

in excess of $1 million. The relevant set

of small business concerns affected by

this report obviously includes the set of

ILECs identified above (‘‘fewer than

1,347 small ILECs’’) to the extent that

any earn more than $1 million in annual

revenues, but also must include small

business concern from all other carrier

groups, including both wireline and

wireless (radiotelephone) carriers.23 We

first discuss non-LEC wireline carriers,

including interexchange carriers (IXCs),

competitive access providers (CAPs),

Operator Service Providers (OSPs), Pay

Telephone Operators, and resellers.

11. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed definitions for small

entities specifically applicable to these

wireline service types. The closest

applicable definition under SBA rules

for all these service types is for

telephone communications companies

other than radiotelephone (wireless)

companies. The most reliable source of

information regarding the number of

IXCs, CAPs, OSPs, Pay Telephone

Operators, and resellers nationwide of

which we are aware appears to be the

data that we collect annually in

connection with the TRS. According to

our most recent data: 97 companies

reported that they are engaged in the

provision of interexchange services; 30

companies reported that they are

engaged in the provision of competitive

access services; 29 companies reported

that they are engaged in the provision of

operator services; 197 companies

reported that they are engaged in the

provision of pay telephone services; and

206 companies reported that they are

engaged in the resale of telephone

services.24 Although it seems certain

that some of these carriers are not

independently owned and operated, or

have more than 1,500 employees, and,

further, that within the potential set of

small entities not all would earn annual

revenues in excess of $1 million, we are

unable at this time to estimate with

greater precision the number of IXCs,

CAPs, OSPs, Pay Telephone Operators,

and resellers that would both qualify as

small business concerns under SBA’s

definition and be subject to the Report’s

$1 million annual revenue requirement.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 97 small entity IXCs; 30

small entity CAPs; 29 small entity OSPs;

197 small entity pay telephone service

providers; and 206 small entity

providers of resale telephone service

that might be affected by the actions and

rules adopted in the Report and Order.

Again, in every case, these actions and

rules either eliminate or reduce the

regulatory burdens imposed on any

such small entities.

12. We now discuss non-wireline

carriers, including: Wireless

(Radiotelephone) Carriers; Cellular

Service Carriers; and Mobile Service

Carriers.
5164 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

25United States Department of Commerce,

Bureau of the Census, ‘‘1992 Census of

Transportation, Communications, and Utilities:

Establishment and Firm Size,’’ at Firm Size 1–123

(1995) (1992 Census).

26 13 CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC Code 4812).

27TRS Worksheet, at Tbl. 21 (Average Total

Telecommunications Revenue Reported by Class of

Carrier).

28Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law

104–13 (1995).

29NPRM.

30See Section D of this Final Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (concluding that four reports

eliminated by this Report and Order might

potentially affect small entities: (1) NSEP Report,

(10) Billing and Collection Report, (11) Circuit

Report, and (12) Record Carrier Letter).

31NPRM. See OMB No. 3060–0149. The per-hour

reduction was calculated by comparing the OMB

hourly estimates provided in the NPRM (showing

the burden on entities after the Report and Order)

with the OMB control number listing (showing the

approved burdens for the respective reporting

requirements as existing before this Report and

Order).

32NPRM. See OMB No. 3060–0515.

33NPRM. See OMB No. 3060–0355.

34NPRM. See OMB No. 3060–0147.

13. SBA has developed a definition of

small entities for Wireless

(Radiotelephone) Carriers. The Census

Bureau reports that there were 1,176

such companies in operation for at least

one year at the end of 1992.25 According

to SBA’s definition, a small business

radiotelephone company is one

employing fewer than 1,500 persons.26

The Census Bureau also reported that

1,164 of those radiotelephone

companies had fewer than 1,000

employees. Thus, even if all of the

remaining 12 companies had more than

1,500 employees, there would still be

1,164 radiotelephone companies that

might qualify as small entities if they

are independently owned and operated.

Although it seems certain that some of

these carriers are not independently

owned and operated, and, further, that

within the set of potential small entities

not all such entities would earn annual

revenues in excess of $1 million, we are

unable to estimate with greater

precision the number of radiotelephone

carriers and service providers that

would both qualify as small business

concerns under SBA’s definition and be

subject to the Report’s $1 million annual

revenue requirement. Consequently, we

estimate that there are fewer than 1,164

small entity radiotelephone companies

that might be affected by the actions and

rules adopted in the Report and Order.

Again, in every case, these actions and

rules either eliminate or reduce the

regulatory burdens imposed on any

such small entities.

14. Neither the Commission nor SBA

has developed a definition of small

entities specifically applicable to

Cellular Service Carriers and to Mobile

Service Carriers. The closest applicable

definition under SBA rules for both

services is for telephone companies

other than radiotelephone (wireless)

companies. The most reliable source of

information regarding the number of

Cellular Service Carriers and Mobile

Service Carriers nationwide of which

we are aware appears to be the data that

we collect annually in connection with

the TRS. According to our most recent

data, 789 companies reported that they

are engaged in the provision of cellular

services and 117 companies reported

that they are engaged in the provision of

mobile services.27 Although it seems

certain that some of these carriers are

not independently owned and operated,

or have more than 1,500 employees,

and, further, that within the potential

set of small entities not all would earn

annual revenues in excess of $1 million,

we are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

Cellular Service Carriers and Mobile

Service Carriers that would qualify as

small business concerns under SBA’s

definition and be subject to the Report’s

$1 million annual revenue requirement.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

fewer than 789 small entity Cellular

Service Carriers and fewer than 117

small entity Mobile Service Carriers that

might be affected by the actions and

rules adopted in the Report and Order.

Again, in every case, these actions and

rules either eliminate or reduce the

regulatory burdens imposed on any

such small entities.

E. Description of Projected Reporting,

Record Keeping and Other Compliance

Requirements of the Rules

15. As detailed in the body of the

Report and Order, these rules will

significantly reduce the amount of

reporting, record keeping, and

compliance requirements which was

previously placed on the regulated

entities—including the small entities

identified above. In our efforts to

quantify the economic impact of this

Report and Order on small businesses,

we refer to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) and its analyses of

administrative burdens imposed by

agency rules and policies.28 OMB has

approved Bureau estimates of ‘‘burden

hours’’ for the following reports which

our analysis has shown to affect small

entities: (11) Circuit Report, (12) Record

Carrier Letter, (14) Form 492 Rate of

Return Report, and (17) Report of

Unsecured Credit to Political

Candidates.29

16. With respect to those four reports

affecting small entities that are

eliminated by this Report and Order, the

Bureau has prepared and OMB has

approved estimates of the benefits for

two of these reports: (10) Circuit Report

and (12) Record Carrier Letter.30

According to these Bureau and OMB

estimates, the Bureau’s action to

eliminate the Circuit Report will result

in a savings of 500 hours per year, in

toto, to the nondominant carriers

formerly required to file that report.31

For those record carriers formerly

required to file the Record Carrier

Report, it is estimated that this Report

and Order will save approximately 20

hours per year, in toto, by eliminating

this report.32 While OMB does not

maintain estimates for the other two

reports eliminated, (1) NSEP Report and

(10) Billing and Collection Report, it is

clear that, as a result of the Bureau’s

actions, the small businesses previously

subject to these reports will see reduced

expenses for associated accounting,

legal, and administrative activities.

17. As set out in Section D of the

Report and Order, the Bureau modified

three reports that might potentially

affect small entities: (14) Form 492 Rate

of Return Report, (15) Joint Board

Monitoring Program, and (17) Report of

Unsecured Credit to Political

Candidates. According to OMB analysis

of report (14), the Form 492 Rate of

Return Report, the Bureau’s action in

this Report and Order will reduce the

total burden on all businesses, both

small and otherwise, by 840 hours per

year.33 OMB estimates for report (17),

Report of Unsecured Credit to Political

Candidates, indicate that as a result of

the Bureau’s action in this Report and

Order, carriers—small entities and

otherwise—will spend 104 hours less

per year, in toto, to comply with the

reporting requirements.34 With respect

to (15) the Joint Board Monitoring

Program, no OMB estimates are

available to calculate the precise

economic benefit to NECA—the only

entity subject to this reporting

requirement; however, it is clear that by

reducing the frequency of filing from

monthly to quarterly reports, NECA will

bear a relatively smaller burden than it

did under the prior schedule.

F. Steps Taken to Minimize Impact on

Small Entities Consistent With Stated

Objectives

18. As discussed in detail in Section

E of the Report and Order, to the extent

that if affects small entities, the impact

of this Report and Order is only

beneficial. The primary thrust of this

Report and Order is to reduce

administrative burdens wherever

possible. It does not impose any new
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5165

35See Part III of the Report and Order (discussing

alternative proposals submitted by commenters for

the Form 492 Rate of Return Report, at para. 37–

38, Joint Board Monitoring Program, at para. 40–41,

New Service Tracking Report, at para. 43–46,

Report of Unsecured Credit to Political Candidates,

at para. 48–49).

36 Id. 37Cincinnati Bell Telephone Comments at 1–2.

requirements. Because this action does

not include changes in format reports or

additional reporting requirements, there

are no steps necessary to minimize any

impact on small entities. Small entities

and large entities alike should be able to

benefit immediately from the Bureau’s

actions to eliminate or reduce

requirements pursuant to this Report

and Order.

G. Significant Alternatives Considered

and Rejected

19. Again, the action does not impose

additional burdens on small entities and

will in fact have a positive impact by

reducing administrative burdens on a

wide variety of entities. Nonetheless, we

did consider a number of alternatives to

the Report and Order as issued.

20. Where we merely modified the

filing frequency, we received comments

from a number of parties recommending

that we instead eliminate the subject

reporting requirements.35 We carefully

considered these options in light of our

own experience and in light of reply

comments from other parties. As

discussed in detail in Part III, we are

persuaded that these reports still serve

important interests and should be

retained.36 We conclude that this Report

and Order achieves the proper balance

between reducing burdens and fulfilling

important monitoring objectives.

21. Another alternative considered

was offered by CompTel, an association

of telecommunications providers

including interexchange carriers.

CompTel suggested imposing a new

requirement to replace the Billing and

Collections Report. While specifically

supporting our proposed elimination of

the Billing and Collections Report,

CompTel argued that copies of all such

contracts should be filed with the

Commission. We rejected CompTel’s

proposal because it would impose

significant administrative burdens on

ILECs, both large and small, to monitor

a market which the vast majority of the

parties concluded to be fully

competitive.

22. We received several proposals to

eliminate or alter reports which were

not addressed in the NPRM. For

example, Cincinnati Bell Telephone, a

self-described mid-size local exchange

carrier, proposes that the Commission

increase the revenue threshold for filing

for various reports including Cost

Allocation Manuals (CAMS).37 While

we recognize that such changes might

exempt smaller ILECs from some of

these filing requirements, we choose not

be follow such suggestions without

giving other parties an opportunity to

comment. We believe that this and other

such proposals would be more

appropriately considered in a separate

proceeding and are outside the scope of

our delegated authority. To that extent,

we reaffirm that this Report and Order

is a reflection of our continuing

commitment to minimizing the adverse

impact of the Commission’s rules.

H. Report to Congress

23. The Bureau shall send a copy of

this Final Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis, along with the Report and

Order, in a report to Congress pursuant

to the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5

U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). A copy of this FRFA

will also be published in the Federal

Register.

Ordering Clauses

24. Accordingly, it is ordered,

pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201–

205, 218, 226, and 303(r) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

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

201–205, 218, 226, 303(r), and §§ 0.91

and 0.291 of the Commission’s rules, 47

CFR 0.91 and 0.291, that the

Commission’s rules and policies are

amended as set forth below, effective

March 6, 1997.

25. It is further ordered, pursuant to

Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.91 and

0.291, that the proposal in Revision of

Filing Requirements that Payphone

Compensation reports be filed

semiannually is rescinded.

List of Subjects In

47 CFR Part 43

Communications common carriers,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Telegraph, Telephone.

47 CFR Part 63

Communications common carriers,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Telegraph, Telephone.

47 CFR Part 64

Civil defense, Communications

common carriers, Credits, Political

candidates, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Telegraph,

Telephone.

47 CFR Part 65

Communications common carriers,

Credits, Political candidates, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements,

Telegraph, Telephone.

Federal Communications Commission.

Peyton Wynns,

Chief, Industry Analysis Division.

Rule Changes

Parts 43, 63, 64, and 65 of Title 47 of

the Code of Federal Regulations are

amended as follows:

PART 43—REPORTS OF

COMMUNICATIONS COMMON

CARRIERS AND CERTAIN AFFILIATES

1. The authority citation for part 43

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 4, 48 Stat. 1066, as

amended; 47 U.S.C. 154;

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L.

104–104, secs. 402(b)(2)(B), (c), 110 Stat. 56

(1996) unless otherwise noted. Interpret or

apply secs. 211, 219, 220, 48 Stat. 1073, 1077,

as amended; 47 U.S.C. 211, 219, 220.

2. Paragraph (d) of § 43.21 is revised

to read as follows:

§ 43.21 Annual reports of carriers and

certain affiliates.

* * * * *

(d) Each miscellaneous common

carrier (as defined by § 21.2 of this

chapter) with operating revenues for a

calendar year in excess of the indexed

revenue threshold shall file with the

Common Carrier Bureau Chief a letter

showing its operating revenues for that

year and the value of its total

communications plant at the end of that

year. This letter must be filed by March

31 of the following year.

* * * * *

§ 43.41 [Removed and Reserved]

3. Section 43.41 is removed and

reserved.

PART 63—EXTENSION OF LINES AND

DISCONTINUANCE, REDUCTION,

OUTAGE AND IMPAIRMENT OF

SERVICE BY COMMON CARRIER; AND

GRANTS OF RECOGNIZED PRIVATE

OPERATING AGENCY STATUS

4. The authority citation for part 63

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 1, 4(i), 201–205, 218, and

403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, and sec. 613 of the Cable

Communications Policy Act of 1984, 47 USC

151, 154(i) 15(j), 201–205, 218, 403, and 533

unless otherwise noted.

§ 63.07 [Amended]

5. Section 63.07 is amended by

removing paragraph (b) and
5166 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph

(b).

PART 64—MISCELLANEOUS RULES

RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

6. The authority citation for Part 64

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 4, 48 Stat. 1066, as

amended; 47 U.S.C. 154,

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L.

104–104, secs. 402(b)(2)(B), (c), 110 Stat. 56

(1996) unless otherwise noted. Interpret or

apply secs. 201, 218, 226, 228, 48 Stat. 1070,

as amended, 1077; 47 U.S.C. 201, 218, 226,

228 unless otherwise noted.

7. Section 64.804 is amended by

revising the first sentence of the

introductory text of paragraph (g) to

read as follows:

§ 64.804 Rules governing the extension of

unsecured credit to candidates or persons

on behalf of such candidates for Federal

office for interstate and foreign common

carrier communication services.

* * * * *

(g) On or before January 31, 1973, and

on corresponding dates of each year

thereafter, each carrier which had

operating revenues in the preceding

year in excess of $1 million shall file

with the Commission a report by

account of any amount due and unpaid,

as of the end of the month prior to the

reporting date, for interstate and foreign

communications services to a candidate

or person on behalf of such candidate

when such amount results from the

extension of unsecured credit. * * *

PART 65—INTERSTATE RATE OF

RETURN PRESCRIPTION

PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGIES

8. The authority citation for Part 65

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 201, 202, 203, 205, 218,

403, 48 Stat., 1066, 1072, 1077, 1094, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 201, 202, 203,

204, 205, 218, 219, 220, 403.

9. Section 65.600 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 65.600 Rate of return reports

* * * * *

(b) Each local exchange carrier or

group of affiliated carriers which is not

subject to §§ 61.41 through 61.49 of this

chapter and which has filed individual

access tariffs during the preceding

enforcement period shall file with the

Commission within three (3) months

after the end of each calendar year, an

annual rate of return monitoring report

which shall be the enforcement period

report. Reports shall be filed on the

appropriate report form prescribed by

the Commission (see s 1.795 of this

chapter) and shall provide full and

specific answers to all questions

propounded and information requested

in the currently effective report form.

The number of copies to be filed shall

be specified in the applicable report

form. At least one copy of the report

shall be signed on the signature page by

the responsible officer. A copy of each

report shall be retained in the principal

office of the respondent and shall be

filed in such a manner as to be readily

available for reference and inspection.

Final adjustments to the enforcement

period report shall be made by

September 30 of the year following the

enforcement period to ensure that any

refunds can be properly reflected in an

annual access filing.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–2703 Filed 2–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Part 570

[APD 2800.12A, CHGE 74]

RIN 3090–AF92

General Services Administration

Acquisition Regulation; Acquisition of

Leasehold Interests in Real Property

AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy.

GSA.

ACTION: Interim rule adopted as final.

SUMMARY: The General Services

Administration Acquisition Regulation

(GSAR) interim rule published at 61 FR

2470, May 16, 1996, is converted to a

final rule with changes. The interim rule

is amended to revise section 570.106 to

reflect changes made as a result of

public comments. Section 570.303 of

the interim rule is adopted as final

without change. The interim rule

published at 61 FR 2470, May 16, 1996,

authorized the use of design-build select

procedures in Section 303M of the

Federal Property and Administrative

Services Act of 1949, as amended by

Public Law 104–106, February 10, 1996,

for lease construction projects.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Wisnowski, GSA Acquisition Policy

Division, (202) 501–1224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Public Comments

Comments on the interim rule

published on May 16, 1996, (61 FR

24720) were submitted by the Council

on Federal Procurement of Architectural

and Engineering Services (COFPAES).

COFPAES recommended revision of

section 570.106(c) to more closely

reflect statutory language, including

circumstances for use of two-phase

design-build procedures and

specification of all criteria to be

considered by the contracting officer.

This revision has been incorporated in

the final rule.

B. Executive Order 12866

This rule is not a significant rule as

defined in Executive Order 12866.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The GSA certifies that this final rule

will not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities

within the meaning of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,

because the rule will apply to a very

small number of leases per year (less

than 25) and the rule simplifies

procedures and reduces the cost of

competing in the initial phases of a

procurement.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the changes to the

GSAR do not impose recordkeeping or

information collection requirements, or

otherwise collect information from

offerors, contractors or members of the

public that require approval of the

Office of Management and Budget under

44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

E. Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804. This rule was submitted to

Congress and GAO under 5 U.S.C. 804.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 570

Government procurement.

Accordingly, the interim rule

amending 48 CFR Part 570 which was

published at 61 FR 24720 on May 16,

1996, is adopted as a final rule with the

following changes:

PART 570—ACQUISITION OF

LEASEHOLD INTERESTS IN REAL

PROPERTY

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

570-continues to read as follows:

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c).

2. Section 570.106 is amended by

revising paragraphs (c), (c)(1), (c)(2), and

(c)(3) to read as follows:

570.106 Methods of contracting

* * * * *

(c) Unless another acquisition

procedure authorized by law is used,

the design-build selection procedures in

section 303M of the Federal Property