59842 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Carol W. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–29293 Filed 11–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 36

[CC Docket No. 80–286; FCC 97–354]

Jurisdictional Separations Reform and

Referral to the Federal-State Joint

Board

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On October 2, 1997, the

Commission adopted a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), that

initiates a proceeding with the goal of

reviewing comprehensively the Part 36

jurisdictional separations procedures to

ensure that they meet the objectives of

the Telecommunication Act of 1996

(1996 Act), and to consider changes that

may need to be made to the

jurisdictional separations process in

light of changes in the law, technology,

and market structure of the

telecommunications industry. Pursuant

to section 410(c) of the Communications

Act, the Commission refers the issues

raised in the NPRM to the Federal-State

Joint Board established in CC Docket

No. 80–286 (Separations Joint Board) for

preparation of a recommended decision.

This NPRM contains proposed or

modified information collections subject

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA). It has been submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review under the PRA. OMB,

the general public, and other Federal

agencies are invited to comment on the

proposed or modified information

collections contained in this

proceeding.

DATES: Pursuant to applicable

procedures set forth in §§ 1.415 and

1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR

1.415 and 1.419, interested parties may

file comments on or before December

10, 1997, and reply comments on or

before January 26, 1998. Written

comments by the public on the

proposed and/or modified information

collections are due December 10, 1997.

Written comments must be submitted by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) on the proposed and/or modified

information collections on or before

January 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Parties should send their

comments or reply comments to Office

of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, N.W., Room 222, Washington,

D.C. 20554. Parties should also send a

paper copy, and a copy on 3.5 inch

diskette formatted in an IBM compatible

form using, if possible, WordPerfect 5.1

for Windows software, to Connie

Chapman of the Common Carrier

Bureau’s Accounting and Audits

Division, 2000 L Street, N.W., room

258H, Washington, D.C. 20554. Parties

also must serve comments on the

Federal-State Joint Board in accordance

with the service list (See Attachment).

Commenters should also provide one

copy of any documents filed in this

proceeding to the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, 1231 20th Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20036.

In addition to filing comments with

the Secretary, a copy of any comments

on the information collections

contained herein should be submitted to

Judy Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via the

Internet to jboley@fcc.gov, and to

Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236

NEOB, 725–17th Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20503 or via the

Internet to fainlt@al.eop.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lynn Vermillera, Accounting and

Audits Division, Common Carrier

Bureau, (202) 418–7120. Alternate

contact, Connie Chapman (202) 418–

0885. For additional information

concerning the information collections

contained in this Notice contact Judy

Boley at 202–418–0214, or via the

Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking adopted October

2, 1997, and released October 7, 1997

The full text of this Commission NPRM

is available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Public Reference Room (Room

239), 1919 M St., N.W., Washington,

D.C. The complete text of this NPRM

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20036.

Summary of Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

1. The NPRM seeks comment on the

changes in law, technology, and market

structure of the telecommunications

industry that affect the separations

process. It then seeks comment on the

criteria that should be used to evaluate

the existing separations process and

proposals to reform the process in light

of the goals of our comprehensive

review.

2. In addition, the NPRM seeks

comment on whether separations rules

are still needed during the transition

period from a regulated to a competitive

marketplace. In this section, the

Commission seeks comment on whether

some form of separations must exist

under the 1930 Smith v. Illinois

decision, or whether statutory,

regulatory and market changes since

that decision have been so pronounced

and persuasive as to make its holding

inapplicable in the new deregulatory

environment.

3. The NPRM then seeks comment on

industry proposals to replace the

existing Part 36 separations rules. In

particular, the NPRM seeks comment on

three industry proposals. The NPRM

first seeks comment on NYNEX’s

proposal to separate costs for individual

incumbent local exchange carriers

(ILECs) in a given study area based on

a single, frozen, interstate allocation

factor. It then seeks comment on Bell

South’s proposal to separate costs in

each study area based on two factors,

one for investment and one for

expenses. It then seeks comment on

Southwestern Bell’s proposal to

consolidate the several dozen plant and

service categories in the existing

separations rules into four cost

categories.

4. The NPRM then evaluates the

existing separations rules and seeks

comment on how various separations

reform options would affect prices and

revenue requirements. In this section,

the NPRM seeks comment on revisions

to the definition of ‘‘study area.’’ It also

seeks comment on whether the existing

set of plant, expense, and service

categories should be revised. The NPRM

also seeks comment on whether there is

a need to revise the way in which costs

are apportioned to each category and the

way in which those costs are then

apportioned to the interstate and

intrastate jurisdiction.

5. The NPRM also seeks comment on

whether and how to separate the costs

associated with interconnection. In this

section, the Commission proposes two

alternatives for allocating the costs of

providing interconnection between the

state and federal jurisdiction. The first

alternative is for the costs, once

identified in part 32 as proposed in the

companion NPRM on accounting for

interconnection, to be removed entirely

from the separations process and

allocated through a process designed to

apply exclusively to these costs. The

second alternative is that the costs, once

identified in part 32, be separated
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 59843

1 5 U.S.C. § 603.

2 Id. at § 605(b).

3See id. § 603.

4 Id. § 601(6) (adopting 15 U.S.C. § 632(a)(1)).

5 Id. § 632. See, e.g., Brown Transport Truckload,

Inc. v. Southern Wipers, Inc., 176 B.R. 82 (N.D. Ga.

1994).

6 13 CFR 121.201.

7 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).

through the current separations process

and allocated directly to the state

jurisdiction. In this section, the NPRM

also seeks comment on whether the 8th

Circuit holding in Iowa Utilities Board

v. FCC requires the assignment of all

costs associated with the provision of

local exchange service to the intrastate

jurisdiction.

6. Finally, the NPRM requests

comment regarding changes to the

separations rules that may be necessary

as a result of the Universal Service

Order and the Communications

Assistance for Law Enforcement Act

(CALEA).

Paperwork Reduction Act

7. This NPRM contains either a

proposed or modified information

collection. The Commission, as part of

its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork burdens, invites the general

public and the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) to comment on the

information collections contained in

this NPRM, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13. Public and agency

comments are due at the same time as

other comments on this Notice; OMB

notification of action is due January 5,

1998. Comments should address: (a)

Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

OMB Approval Number: 3060–0233.

Title: Part 36—Separations.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision.

Respondents: Businesses or other for

profit.

Number of Respondents: 100.

Estimated Time Per Response: 20

hours.

Total Annual Burden: 2000 hours for

proposal only. 63,800 burden hours for

all Part 36 requirements.

Estimated costs per respondent: $0.

Needs and Uses: In the Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking issued in CC

Docket No. 80–286, the Commission

initiates a proceeding with the goal of

reviewing comprehensively our Part 36

jurisdictional separations procedures to

ensure that they meet the objectives of

the 1996 Act and to consider changes

that may need to be made to the

jurisdictional separations process in

light of changes in the law, technology,

and market structure of the

telecommunications industry. The

Commission seeks comment on a

proposal allowing incumbent LECs to

separate joint and common costs on an

individual basis. The Commission also

seeks comment on whether this

proposal should be contingent on an

ILEC’s showing that competition exists

in the local markets for which they seek

relaxed separations rules. If such a

showing is required, the Commission

also seeks comment on what level of

competition would be required and

what indicators should be used to

measure the levels of competition in

local markets to ensure that joint and

common costs are allocated in a manner

that produces just and reasonable rates.

The proposed requirement will be used

to determine whether competition exists

in local markets.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

8. This NPRM seeks comment on the

extent to which separations rules are

required, what standards should be used

to evaluate separations proposals, and

what changes should be made to our

existing separations rules. The NPRM

states that we want to adopt rules that

are easily interpreted and that will

minimize any regulatory burdens on

affected parties. Section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as

amended,1 requires an initial Regulatory

Flexibility Act Analysis in notice-andcomment rulemaking proceedings

unless we certify that ‘‘the rule will not,

if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a significant

number of small entities.’’ 2

9. Section 603 of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (‘‘RFA’’) 3 requires an

initial regulatory flexibility analysis that

describes the impact of the proposed

rule on small entities for rulemakings

that are required to have public notice

and comment. We have determined that

the RFA is inapplicable to this

proceeding insofar as it pertains to the

Bell Operating Companies and other

incumbent local exchange carriers. The

RFA defines a ‘‘small business’’ to be

the same as a ‘‘small business concern’’

under the Small Business Act.4 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’’).5 Section

121.201 of the Small Business

Administration regulations defines a

small telecommunications entity in SIC

code 4813 (Telephone Companies

Except Radio Telephone) as any entity

with 1,500 or fewer employees at the

holding company level.6 Because our

proposals concerning the Part 36

separations process will affect all

incumbent local exchange carriers

providing interstate services, some

entities employing fewer than 1500

employees at the holding company level

may be affected by the proposals made

in this NPRM. However, we do not

consider such entities to be ‘‘small

entities’’ under the RFA because they

are either affiliates of large corporations

or dominant in their field of operations.

Therefore, we do not believe that the

proposed rules will affect a substantial

number of small entities. Even if small

ILECs were ‘‘small entities’’ under the

SBA, however, we would still certify

that no regulatory flexibility analysis is

necessary here because none of the

proposals in this NPRM, if adopted,

would have a significant economic

impact (as such term is used in the RFA)

on the carriers which must comply with

our accounting rules. One of the

primary objectives of this proceeding is

to seek comment on proposals to

simplify the current separations process

in an effort to lessen the regulatory

burden on carriers in furtherance of a

deregulatory national policy framework.

10. We therefore certify, pursuant to

section 605(b) of the RFA, that the rules

proposed in this NPRM will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The Commission will publish this

certification in the Federal Register and

will provide a copy of the certification

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

SBA. The Commission will also include

this certification in the report to

Congress pursuant to the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.7

Ordering Clause

11. Accordingly, It Is Ordered that,

pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4, 201–205,

215, 218, 220, 229, 254, and 410 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 201–

205, 215, 218, 220, 229, 254 and 410

that Notice Is Hereby Given of proposed

amendments to Part 36 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR Part 36, as
59844 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

described in this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking.

12. It Is Further Ordered that,

pursuant to section 410(c) of the

Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.

410(c), the proposals set forth in the

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are

hereby referred to the Federal-State Joint

Board established in CC Docket No. 80–

286 for preparation of a recommended

decision.

13. It Is Further Ordered, that a copy

of all filings in this proceeding shall be

served on each of the appointees and

staff personnel on the attached service

list.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 36

Jurisdictional Separations Procedures;

Standard Procedures for Separating

Telecommunications Property, Costs,

Revenues, Expenses, Taxes and

Reserves for Telecommunications

Companies.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Attachment—Service List: 80–286

Separations Federal-State Joint Board

The Honorable Reed E. Hundt,

Chairman, Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street N.W.—

Room 814, Washington, D.C. 20554,

202–418–1000

The Honorable Rachelle B. Chong,

Commissioner, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919

M Street N.W.—Room 844,

Washington, D.C. 20554, 202–418–

2200

The Honorable Susan Ness,

Commissioner, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919

M Street N.W.—Room 832,

Washington, D.C. 20554, 202–418–

2100

The Honorable Cheryl L. Parrino, Chair,

Wisconsin Public Service

Commission, Post Office Box 7854,

Madison, WI 53707–7854

The Honorable David W. Rolka,

Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public

Utility Commission, North Office

Building—Room 110, Commonwealth

Avenue and North Street, Harrisburg,

PA 17105

The Honorable Joan H. Smith,

Commissioner, Oregon Public Utility

Commission, 550 Capitol Street, N.E.,

Salem, OR 97310

The Honorable Thomas L. Welch,

Chairman, Maine Public Utilities

Commission, 242 State Street, State

House Station 18, Augusta, ME 04333

Joint Board Staff

Debra M. Kriete, Pennsylvania Public

Utility Commission, North Office

Building—Room 110, Commonwealth

Avenue and North Street, Harrisburg,

PA 17105–3265

Steve Burnett, Federal Communications

Commission, Common Carrier

Bureau—Accounting & Audits Div.,

2000 L Street, N.W.—Room 257,

Washington, D.C. 20036

Connie Chapman, Federal

Communications Commission,

Common Carrier Bureau—Accounting

& Audits Div., 2000 L Street, N.W.—

Room 258H, Washington, D.C. 20036

Sandy Ibaugh, Indiana Utility

Regulatory Commission, 302 W.

Washington, Suite E–306,

Indianapolis, IN 46204

Jonathon Lakritz, California Public

Utilities Commission, California State

Building 505 Van Ness Avenue, San

Francisco, California 94102

Samuel Loudenslager, Arkansas Public

Service Commission, 1000 Center

Street, Little Rock, AR 72203

Chuck Needy, Federal Communications

Commission, Common Carrier

Bureau—Accounting & Audits Div.,

2000 L Street, N.W.—Room 812,

Washington, D.C. 20036

Paul Pederson, Missouri Public Service

Commission, Post Office Box 360,

Jefferson City, MO 65102

Scott Potter, Public Utilities

Commission of Ohio, 180 E. Broad St.,

3rd Fl., Columbus, OH 43215

James Bradford Ramsay, Assistant

General Counsel, National

Association of Regulatory Utility

Commissioners, 1102 ICC Building,

Constitution Avenue & 12th Street,

N.W., Post Office Box 684,

Washington, D.C. 20044–0684

Jeffrey J. Richter, Public Service

Commission of Wisconsin, P.O. Box

7854, Madison, WI 53707–7854

Mike Sheard, Montana Public Utilities

Commission, 1701 Prospect Ave., P.O.

Box 202601, Helena, MT 59620

Kaylene Shannon, Federal

Communications Commission,

Common Carrier Bureau—Accounting

& Audits Div., 2000 L Street, N.W.—

Room 200H, Washington, D.C. 20036

Joel B. Shifman, Maine Public Utilities

Commission, State House Station #18,

Augusta, ME 04333

Fred Sistarenik, State Joint Board Staff

Chair, New York State Department of

Public Service, Communications

Division, Three Empire State Plaza,

Albany, New York 12223–1350

Cynthia Van Landuyt, Oregon Public

Utility Commission, 550 Capitol St.

NE, Salem, OR 97310

Lynn Vermillera, Federal

Communications Commission,

Common Carrier Bureau—Accounting

& Audits Div., 2000 L Street, N.W.—

Room 200E, Washington, D.C. 20036

John Wobbleton, Federal

Communications Commission,

Common Carrier Bureau—Accounting

& Audits Div., 2000 L Street, N.W.—

Room 257, Washington, D.C. 20036

[FR Doc. 97–29246 Filed 11–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[I.D. 102997A]

RIN 0648-AK13

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; Revise Management

Authority of Pelagic Shelf Rockfish;

Notice of Availability

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery

Management Council (Council) has

submitted Amendment 46 to the Fishery

Management Plan for Groundfish of the

Gulf of Alaska (FMP) for Secretarial

review. This amendment would remove

black and blue rockfish from the FMP.

The State of Alaska would then assume

management of those species. This

action is necessary to allow the State of

Alaska to implement more responsive,

regionally based, management of these

species than is currently possible under

the FMP. NMFS is requesting comments

from the public on the proposed

amendment, copies of which may be

obtained from the Council (see

ADDRESSES).

DATES: Comments on Amendment 46

must be submitted by January 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the FMP

amendment should be submitted to

Chief, Fisheries Management Division,

Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668,

Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori Gravel, or

delivered to the Federal Building, 709

West 9th Street, Juneau, AK. Copies of

Amendment 46 and the Environmental

Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review

(EA/RIR) and related economic analysis

prepared for the proposed action are

available from the North Pacific Fishery

Management Council, 605 West 4th

Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501–

2252; telephone: 907–271–2809.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Kinsolving, 907–586–7228.