66370 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Notices

requirement of Title II of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, is that ‘‘all charges for and in

connection with interstate

communication service, shall be just

and reasonable.’’ This provision

safeguards consumers against rates that

are unreasonably high and guarantees

carriers that they will not be required to

charge rates that are so low as to be

confiscatory. Carriers under the

Commission’s jurisdiction must be

allowed to recover the reasonable costs

of providing service to ratepayers,

including reasonable and prudent

expenses and a fair return on

investment. Obligation to respond:

Mandatory. OMB Control No.: 3060–0760.

Expiration Date: 05/31/98.

Title: Access Charge Reform, CC

Docket No. 96–262 (First Report and

Order); Second Order on

Reconsideration and Memorandum

Opinion and Order; and Third Report

and Order.

Form No.: N/A.

Respondents: Business or other for

profit. Estimated Annual Burden: 14

respondents; 129,001 hours per

response (avg); 1,806,018 total annual

burden hours (for all collections

approved under this control number). Estimated Annual Reporting and

Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $33,000.

Frequency of Response: On occasion;

one-time requirement.

Description: In CC Docket No. 96–262,

the Commission adopted a Third Report

and Order. In the Third Report and

Order, FCC adopts, consistent with

principles of cost causation and

economic efficiency, that where price

cap LECs use general purpose

computers and other general support

facilities (GSF) to provide nonregulated

billing and collection services to

interexchange carriers, such GSF costs

should not be allocated to these LECs’

regulated access and interexchange

categories but, instead, should be

allocated to their nonregulated billing

and collection categories. In the Third

Report and Order, the Commission

requires affected price cap LECs to make

certain exogenous adjustments to their

respective price cap indices (PCIs) and

related basket indices. LECs affected by

this Order are those price cap LECs that

use regulated assets to provide

nonregulated billing and collection

services to interexchange carriers. For

the purposes of estimating the

information collection burdens for the

Third Report and Order, we assume all

price cap LECs are affected by the

Order. Such LECs must determine the

amount of GSF costs that they allocated

to their respective access and

interexchange categories during 1996

and then calculate the amount of such

costs that would have been allocated to

those categories during that year if the

rule changes adopted in the Third

Report and Order had been in effect at

that time. Once that difference is

determined, each affected price cap LEC

is required to make an exogenous

adjustment to its PCIs and related basket

indices to prevent the earlier

misallocation of these costs from

continuing to inflate the rates charges

for regulated services. Separate from the

possible tariff filing burden described

below, we estimate that it would take

each of these price cap LECs four hours

to complete the steps necessary to

determine the amount of the exogenous

price cap index (PCI) and related basket

adjustments required by the Third

Report and Order. Because we assume

this particular burden applies to all 14

price cap LECs, we estimate the total

burden to be 56 hours. Under the Third

Report and Order, affected price cap

LECs are required to make tariff revision

filings on or before December 17, 1997,

to implement these exogenous price cap

adjustments. Because most of these 14

price cap LECs have not yet made such

filings, there should be little or no

additional tariff filing burden associated

with these LECs’ compliance with the

Third Report and Order. For the four

price cap LECs that have already made

access reform tariff filings under other

orders, we estimate that there will be an

additional tariff filing burden of 1272

hours for these LECs as a group.

Incremental burden associated with the

Third Report and Order in this

proceeding is as follows: No. of

respondents: 14; hours per response:

94.8; total annual burden: 1328.

Obligation to respond: Mandatory. Public reporting burden for the

collections 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.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–33044 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

Alternative Dispute Resolution

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Policy statement.

SUMMARY: The FDIC has adopted a

Statement of Policy to further its

commitment to the use of Alternative

Dispute Resolution for resolving

appropriate disputes in a timely and

cost efficient manner and to comply

with the spirit of the Administrative

Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, Pub. L.

104–320.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 9, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James D. Hudson, Counsel (202) 736–

0581, Legal Division, Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board

of Directors of the FDIC has adopted a

Statement of Policy on Alternative

Dispute Resolution. The text of the

Policy Statement follows:

Statement of Policy on Alternative

Dispute Resolution

The Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC) has been and

continues to be committed to the use of

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

for resolving appropriate disputes in a

more timely, less costly manner than

litigation or administrative adjudication.

The FDIC hereby adopts this policy to

reiterate its commitment to ADR, to

express its full support for ADR and to

set forth a framework for the continuing

and expanding use of ADR. The

Corporation views ADR not as an end in

itself, but rather, as an additional tool to

accomplish its business efficiently,

economically and productively. To that

end, the FDIC believes that its ADR

policy should be dynamic and

continually developing.

The FDIC fully supports the costeffective use of ADR, including

negotiation, mediation, early neutral

evaluation, neutral expert fact-finding,

mini-trials and other hybrid forms of

ADR in appropriate instances. The

purpose of this policy is to use ADR in

appropriate instances to resolve

disputes at the earliest stage possible, by

the fastest and least expensive method

possible and at the lowest possible

organizational level consistent with

applicable delegations of authority.

The Deputy General Counsel for

Corporate Operations (or his/her

designee) serves as the Dispute

Resolution Specialist for the

Corporation. In addition, an ADR

Steering Committee, composed of the

Dispute Resolution Specialist (or his/her

designee) and representatives from each

Division and Office, was established by

the Board of Directors in 1994 to

coordinate and encourage appropriate
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Notices 66371

and cost-effective conflict management

practices in all aspects of FDIC

operations and programs. The Dispute

Resolution Specialist, working with the

ADR Steering Committee, shall report to

the Board of Directors on an annual

basis regarding the Corporation’s ADR

efforts, implementation of this policy,

and any revisions or actions necessary.

It is the responsibility of all FDIC

employees to implement this policy and

to practice and promote cost-effective

dispute resolution in FDIC programs

and other areas of Corporation

operation. All management and

employees of the FDIC are hereby

directed to take the necessary steps to

implement this policy and to cooperate

to the fullest extent with the ADR

Steering Committee and the Dispute

Resolution Specialist (and his/her

designee) to promote effective and

appropriate use of ADR at the

Corporation in furtherance of this

policy.

The FDIC welcomes and encourages

input on the use of ADR and comment

on current and potential uses of ADR

from both within and outside the

Corporation.

By order of the Board of Directors.

Dated at Washington, DC, this 9th day of

December, 1997.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

James D. LaPierre,

Deputy Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–33038 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

Coastal Barrier Improvement Act;

Property Availability; State Road 33

South, Lake County, Florida

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the property known as State Road 33

South, located in the City of Groveland,

Lake County, Florida, is affected by

section 10 of the Coastal Barrier

Improvement Act of 1990 as specified

below.

DATES: Written notice of serious interest

to purchase or effect other transfer of all

or any portion of this property may be

mailed or faxed to the FDIC until March

18, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of detailed

descriptions of this property, including

maps, may be obtained from or are

available for inspection by contacting

the following person: Mr. Richard

Espinoza, Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation, Northeast Service Center,

101 East River Drive, East Hartford, CT.

06108, (860) 291–4051; Fax (860) 291–

4077.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The State

Road 33 South property (a.k.a. 11804

State Road 33 South) consists of

approximately 100 acres of undeveloped

land divided into two tracts in a rural

area approximately two miles south of

the city limits of the City of Groveland,

FL. The legal description of the site is

Tracts 1, 2, 15, 16, 34, 47, 48, 49, 50, 63

and 64 in Section 6, Township 23

South, Range 25 East, Groveland Farms,

according to the plat thereof as recorded

in Plat Book 2, Pages 10 and 11, Public

Records of Lake County, FL. The State

Road 33 South property is

predominately wetlands and contains

dense vegetation. This property is

within the State of Florida’s Green

Swamp Area of Critical Concern and is

adjacent to Mill Stream Swamp which

is managed by the St. John’s River Water

Management District for natural

resource conservation purposes. This

property is covered property within the

meaning of Section 10 of the Coastal

Barrier Improvement Act of 1990, Pub.

L. 101–591 (12 U.S.C. 1441a–3).

Written notice of serious interest in

the purchase or other transfer of all or

any portion of this property must be

received on or before March 18, 1998 by

the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation at the appropriate address

stated above.

Eligible Entities

Those entities eligible to submit

written notices of serious interest are:

1. Agencies or entities of the Federal

government;

2. Agencies or entities of State or local

government; and,

3. ‘‘Qualified organizations’’ pursuant

to section 170(h)(3) of the Internal

Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C.

170(h)(3)).

Form of Notice

Written notices of serious interest

must be submitted in the following

form:

NOTICE OF SERIOUS INTEREST

RE: State Road 33 South

Federal Register Publication Date:

December 18, 1997.

1. Entity name.

2. Declaration of eligibility to submit

Notice under criteria set forth in the

Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of

1990, P.L. 101–591, section 10(b)(2), (12

U.S.C. 1441a–3(b)(2)), including, for

qualified organizations, a determination

letter from the United States Internal

Revenue Service regarding the

organization’s status under section

170(h)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue

Code (26 U.S.C. 170(h)(3)).

3. Brief description of proposed terms

of purchase or other offer for all or any

portion of the property (e.g., price,

method of financing, expected closing

date, etc.).

4. Declaration of entity that it intends

to use the property for wildlife refuge,

sanctuary, open space, recreational,

historical, cultural, or natural resource

conservation purposes (12 U.S.C.

1441a–3(b)(4)), as provided in a clear

written description of the purpose(s) to

which the property will be put and the

location and acreage of the area covered

by each purpose(s) including a

declaration of entity that it will accept

the placement, by the FDIC, of an

easement or deed restriction on the

property consistent with its intended

conservation use(s) as stated in its

notice of serious interest.

5. Authorized Representative (Name/

Address/Telephone/Fax).

List of Subjects

Environmental protection.

Dated: December 12, 1997.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

James D. LaPierre,

Deputy Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–33006 Filed 12-17-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

The companies listed in this notice

have applied to the Board for approval,

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.)

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part

225), and all other applicable statutes

and regulations to become a bank

holding company and/or to acquire the

assets or the ownership of, control of, or

the power to vote shares of a bank or

bank holding company and all of the

banks and nonbanking companies

owned by the bank holding company,

including the companies listed below.

The applications listed below, as well

as other related filings required by the

Board, are available for immediate

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank

indicated. The application also will be

available for inspection at the offices of

the Board of Governors. Interested

persons may express their views in

writing on the standards enumerated in

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the

proposal also involves the acquisition of