Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules 69891

Nonconfidential Information Center,

North East Mall Rm. B–607, Waterside

Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC.

The Center is open from noon to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The telephone number for the

Center is (202) 260–7099.

III. How and to Whom Do I Submit

Comments?

As described in Unit I.C. of the

proposed rule published in the Federal

Register of October 18, 2000 (65 FR

62319) (FRL–6745–5), you may submit

your comments through the mail, in

person, or electronically. Please follow

the instructions that are provided in the

proposed rule. Please follow the

instructions in Unit I.D. of the proposed

rule to submit any information that you

consider to be CBI. Do not submit any

information electronically that you

consider to be CBI. To ensure proper

receipt by EPA, be sure to identify

docket control number OPPTS–50639A

in the subject line on the first page of

your response.

IV. What Action is EPA Taking?

EPA is extending the comment period

for the proposed SNUR on PFOS by 45

days, from November 17, 2000 until

January 1, 2001. This proposed rule

would require manufacturers and

importers to notify EPA at least 90 days

before commencing the manufacture or

import of 90 PFOS chemical substances

for the significant new uses described in

the proposed rule.

As stated in Unit VII. of the proposed

rule, EPA believes that the intent of

TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is best served by

designating a use as a significant new

use as of the proposal date of the SNUR,

rather than as of the effective date of the

final rule. If uses begun after publication

of the proposed SNUR were considered

to be ongoing, rather than new, it would

be difficult for EPA to establish SNUR

notice requirements, because any person

could defeat the SNUR by initiating the

proposed significant new use before the

rule became final, and then argue that

the use was ongoing.

Persons who begin commercial

manufacture or import of PFOS for the

significant new uses listed in the

proposed SNUR after the proposal has

been published would be subject to the

requirements of the SNUR when and if

the rule goes final, and would have to

stop that activity unless it meets the

requirements of the final SNUR. Persons

who ceased those activities will have to

meet all SNUR notice requirements and

wait until the end of the notice review

period, including all extensions, before

engaging in any activities designated as

significant new uses. If, however,

persons who begin commercial

manufacture or import of these chemical

substances between the proposal and

the effective date of the SNUR meet the

conditions of advance compliance as

codified at 40 CFR 721.45(h), those

persons will be considered to have met

the final SNUR requirements for those

activities.

V. What is the Agency’s Authority for

Taking this Action?

EPA proposed this SNUR pursuant to

its authority under section 5(a)(2) of

TSCA.

VI. Do Any Regulatory Assessment

Requirements Apply to this Action?

No. This action is not a rulemaking,

it merely extends the date by which

public comments must be submitted to

EPA on a proposed rule that previously

published in the Federal Register. For

information about the applicability of

the regulatory assessment requirements

to the proposed rule, please refer to the

discussion in Unit XI. of that document

(65 FR 62319, 62330).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Hazardous materials, Recordkeeping

and reporting requirements.

Dated: November 15, 2000.

Charles M. Auer,

Director, Chemical Control Division.

[FR Doc. 00–29782 Filed 11–16–00; 3:44 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[WT Docket No. 00–193; FCC 00–361]

Automatic and Manual Roaming

Obligations Pertaining to Commercial

Mobile Radio Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In this notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM), we initiate a new

proceeding to consider whether the

Commission should adopt an

‘‘automatic’’ roaming rule that would

apply to Commercial Mobile Radio

Service (CMRS) systems and whether

we should sunset the ‘‘manual’’ roaming

requirement that currently applies to

those systems.

DATES: The agency must receive

comments on or before January 5, 2001,

and reply comments on or before

February 5, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

Murray, Wireless Telecommunications

Bureau, at (202) 418–7240; additional

information concerning the information

collections contained in this document

contact Judy Boley at (202) 418–0214, or

via the Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Federal

Communications Commission’s (the

Commission) Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, FCC 00–361, in WT Docket

No. 00–193, adopted on October 4, 2000

and released on November 1, 2000. The

full text of this NPRM is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center, Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street,

SW., Washington, DC. The complete

text may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

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

Washington, D.C. 20037. The full text

may also be downloaded at:

www.fcc.gov. Alternative formats are

available to persons with disabilities by

contacting Martha Contee at (202) 418–

0260 or TTY (202) 418–2555.

Synopsis of Memorandum Opinion and

Order

I. Introduction

1. In this notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM), we initiate a new

proceeding to consider whether the

Commission should adopt an

‘‘automatic’’ roaming rule that would

apply to Commercial Mobile Radio

Service (CMRS) systems and whether

we should sunset the ‘‘manual’’ roaming

requirement that currently applies to

those systems. The Commission recently

terminated its previous consideration of

these roaming issues in Docket No. 94–

54. In light of the significant growth and

development during the last few years

of CMRS services, we believe that a new

docket dedicated solely to roaming

issues best ensures that we will have

up-to-date information on whether

roaming services should be regulated.

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

A. Current Requirements

2. Prior to 1996, the Commission’s

rules required only cellular carriers to

offer manual roaming. In the

Commission’s 1996 Second Report and

Order and accompanying Third NPRM,

11 FCC Rcd 9462, published 61 FR

44026 (Aug. 27, 1996), we considered

the imposition of manual and automatic

roaming obligations on CMRS providers

generally. In the Second Report and

Order, we determined that the

availability of roaming was important to

69892 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules

the development of nationwide,

competitive wireless voice

telecommunications, and that during

the period of systems build-out market

forces alone might not cause roaming to

become widely available. Accordingly,

we extended the Commission’s thenexisting manual roaming rule requiring

cellular carriers to serve individual

roamers to include both broadband PCS

and ‘‘covered’’ SMR providers.

3. In the Third NPRM, the

Commission invited additional

comment on both automatic and manual

roaming asking whether the

Commission should promulgate any

rule governing covered providers’

obligations to provide automatic

roaming service. The Third NPRM

further posited that the market would

likely render any automatic roaming

rule unnecessary five years after the last

group of initial licenses for broadband

PCS spectrum was awarded, and it

asked whether any automatic roaming

rule, as well as the existing manual

roaming rule, should be sunset at that

time.

4. In July 2000, the Commission

generally affirmed the manual roaming

requirement in its Third Report and

Order and Memorandum Opinion and

Order on Reconsideration, CC Docket

No. 94–54, FCC 00–251 (rel. Aug. 28,

2000) (Manual Roaming Order on

Reconsideration), published 65 FR

58477 (Sep. 29, 2000). However, the

Manual Roaming Order on

Reconsideration changed the definition

of which CMRS providers were

‘‘covered’’ and extended the rule’s

coverage to certain data providers. Thus

the manual roaming requirement, as

amended, applies to all cellular,

broadband PCS, and SMR providers that

offer real-time, two-way switched voice

or data service that is interconnected

with the public switched network and

utilizes an in-network switching facility

that enables the provider to reuse

frequencies and accomplish seamless

hand-offs of subscriber calls. The

Commission also terminated CC Docket

No. 94–54 finding that changes in the

market and technology had rendered the

record stale.

C. Proposed Rule Changes

5. In this document, we invite

comments on: (1) Whether we should

adopt an automatic roaming

requirement that would apply to certain

CMRS providers; and (2) whether we

should, either now or in the future,

sunset the existing manual roaming

requirement placed on those providers.

Those wishing to file comments should

pay close attention to the specific

requests for information made in the

NPRM.

Procedural Matters

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

6. As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission

has prepared an Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the

possible significant economic impact on

small entities of the potential regulatory

actions on which comment is requested

in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

The IRFA is set forth in the attached

Appendix. Written public comments are

requested on the IRFA. These comments

must be filed in accordance with the

same filing deadlines for comments on

the rest of this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, as set forth in Section

IV(C), infra, and they must have a

separate and distinct heading

designating them as responses to the

IRFA. The Commission’s Office of

Public Affairs, Reference Operations

Division, will send a copy of this Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking, including the

IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy

of the Small Business Administration,

in accordance with the RFA. In

addition, this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, including the IRFA (or

summaries thereof), will be published in

the Federal Register.

B. Ex Parte Rules

7. This document initiates and

constitutes a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’

proceeding in accordance with the

Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons

making oral ex parte presentations

relating to the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking are reminded that

memoranda summarizing the

presentations must contain summaries

of the substance of the presentations

and not merely a listing of the subjects

discussed. More than a one or two

sentence description of the views and

arguments presented is generally

required. Other rules pertaining to oral

and written presentations are set forth

in § 1.1206(b) as well. Interested parties

are to file with the Secretary, FCC, and

serve International Transcription

Services (ITS) with copies of any

written ex parte presentations or

summaries of oral ex parte presentations

in these proceedings in the manner

specified below for filing comments.

C. Filing Procedures

8. Pursuant to §§ 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 January 5, 2001,

and reply comments on or before

February 5, 2001. Comments may be

filed using the Commission’s Electronic

Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by

filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing

of Documents in Rulemaking

Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).

9. Comments filed through the ECFS

can be sent as an electronic file via the

Internet to <http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/

ecfs.html>. Generally, only one copy of

an electronic submission must be filed.

In completing the transmittal screen,

commenters should include their full

name, Postal Service mailing address,

and the applicable docket or rulemaking

number. Parties may also submit an

electronic comment by Internet e-mail.

To get filing instructions for e-mail

comments, commenters should send an

e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should

include the following words in the body

of the message, ‘‘get form <your e-mail

address>.’’ A sample form and

directions will be sent in reply.

10. Parties who choose to file by

paper must file an original and four

copies of each filing. All filings must be

sent to the Commission’s Secretary,

Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the

Secretary, Federal Communications

Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, S.W.;

TW–A325; Washington, D.C. 20554.

11. Regardless of whether parties

choose to file electronically or by paper,

parties should also file one copy of any

documents filed in this docket with the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 445 Twelfth Street, S.W., Room

CY–B402, Washington, D.C. 20554.

Comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center, 445 12th Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554.

12. Comments and reply comments

must include a short and concise

summary of the substantive arguments

raised in the pleading. Comments and

reply comments must also comply with

§ 1.49, 47 CFR 1.49, and all other

applicable sections of the Commission’s

rules. We also direct all interested

parties to include the name of the filing

party and the date of the filing on each

page of their comments and reply

comments. All parties are encouraged to

utilize a table of contents, regardless of

the length of their submission.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

13. As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission

has prepared this present Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)

of the possible significant economic

impact on small entities by the policies

and rules proposed in this Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Written

public comments are requested on this

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules 69893

IRFA. Comments must be identified as

responses to the IRFA and must be filed

by the deadlines for comments on this

NPRM provided above in Section IV(C),

and they must have a separate and

distinct heading designating them as

responses to the IRFA. The Commission

will send a copy of the NPRM,

including this IRFA, to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration, in accordance

with the RFA. In addition, the NPRM

and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be

published in the Federal Register.

A. Need for and Objectives of the

Proposed Rules

14. This NPRM requests comment on

two issues that pertain to the regulation

or possible regulation of certain

commercial mobile radio service

(CMRS) providers’ obligations. First, the

NPRM requests comment on whether

the Commission should, either now or

in the future, sunset the existing

‘‘manual’’ roaming requirement. The

existing manual roaming rule requires

that covered cellular, broadband

Personal Communications Services

(PCS) and Specialized Mobile Radio

(SMR) carriers make service available to

individual users upon request, so long

as the roamer’s handset is technically

capable of accessing their services.

‘‘Manual’’ roaming is the most

rudimentary form of roaming; it is the

only form of roaming available when

there is no pre-existing contractual

relationship between a subscriber, or the

subscriber’s home system, and the

system on which the subscriber wants to

roam. In order to make or receive a call,

the subscriber must establish such a

relationship. Typically, the ‘‘manual’’

roamer accomplishes this by attempting

to originate a call by giving a valid

credit card number to the carrier

providing roaming service. Specifically,

the NPRM requests comment on

whether the ‘‘manual’’ roaming rule

should sunset on five years after the last

group of initial licenses are issued for

broadband spectrum, that is, November

24, 2002.

15. Second, the NPRM requests

comment on whether the Commission

should adopt an ‘‘automatic’’ roaming

requirement that would apply to CMRS

providers, and if so, how it should be

designed and implemented and for what

period of time. ‘‘Automatic’’ roaming

permits a subscriber to make and

receive calls simply by turning on his or

her phone, and it requires an agreement

between the home and roamed-on

systems. Specifically, the NPRM seeks

comment on whether it should adopt a

rule requiring carriers that enter

‘‘automatic’’ roaming agreements with

any other carrier to make like

agreements available to ‘‘similarly

situated’’ providers under nondiscriminatory rates, terms, and

conditions. The Commission also seeks

comment on the potential costs of an

‘‘automatic’’ roaming rule, including

whether it would impede technological

progress, whether it would interfere

with free and open competition, and

whether it would expose providers to

the risk of losses due to fraud. The

Commission requests comment on what

administrative costs would be involved,

and how any rule should be drafted so

as to minimize such costs.

B. Legal Basis

16. The potential actions on which

comment is sought in this NPRM would

be authorized under §§ 1, 2(a), 4(i), 4(j),

201(b), 251(a), 253, 303(r), and

332(c)(1)(B) of the Communications Act

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,

152(a), 154(i), 154(j), 201(b), 251(a), 253,

303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B).

C. Description and Estimate of the Small

Entities Subject to the Rules

17. The RFA requires that an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis be

prepared for notice-and-comment

rulemaking proceedings, unless the

agency certifies that ‘‘the rule will not,

if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.’’ The RFA

generally defines ‘‘small entity’’ as

having the same meaning as the terms

‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’

and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’

In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’

has the same meaning as the term

‘‘small business concern’’ under the

Small Business Act. A small business

concern is one which: (1) Is

independently owned and operated; (2)

is not dominant in its field of operation;

and (3) satisfies any additional criteria

established by the Small Business

Administration (SBA).

18. To assist the Commission in its

analysis, commenters are requested to

provide information regarding which

CMRS entities would be affected by the

regulations on which the Commission

seeks comment in this NPRM. In

particular, we seek estimates of how

many small entities that might be

affected.

19. The possible sunset of the existing

‘‘manual’’ roaming rule, if adopted,

would eliminate the requirement that

covered cellular, broadband PCS and

SMR carriers make service available to

individual users upon request, so long

as the roamer’s handset is technically

capable of accessing their services.

Sunsetting of this rule would be

expected to reduce the existing

regulatory burden, if any, on small

businesses that must comply with the

requirements of the ‘‘manual’’ roaming

rule.

20. The ‘‘automatic’’ roaming

regulations on which the Commission

seeks comment, if adopted, would apply

to providers of cellular, broadband PCS,

and SMR providers that offer real-time,

two-way switched voice or data service

that is interconnected with the public

switched network and utilizes an innetwork switching facility that enables

the provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls.

Estimates for Cellular Licensees

21. Neither the Commission nor the

SBA has developed a definition of small

entities applicable to cellular licensees.

Therefore, the applicable definition of a

small entity is the definition under the

SBA rules applicable to radiotelephone

(wireless) companies. This provides that

a small entity is a radiotelephone

company employing no more than 1,500

persons. According to the Bureau of the

Census, only twelve radiotelephone

firms from a total of 1,178 such firms

which operated during 1992 had 1,000

or more employees. Therefore, even if

all twelve of these firms were cellular

telephone companies, nearly all cellular

carriers were small businesses under the

SBA’s definition. In addition, we note

that there are 1,758 cellular licenses;

however, a cellular licensee may own

several licenses. In addition, according

to the most recent Trends in Telephone

Service data, 808 carriers reported that

they were engaged in the provision of

either cellular service, Personal

Communications Service (PCS), or

Specialized Mobile Radio Telephone

(SMR) service, which are placed

together in the data. We do not have

data specifying the number of these

carriers that are not independently

owned and operated or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of cellular service

carriers that would qualify as small

business concerns under the SBA’s

definition. Consequently, we estimate

that there are 808 or fewer small cellular

service carriers that may be affected by

any regulations adopted pursuant to this

proceeding.

22. Additionally, any rules adopted

pursuant to this rulemaking will apply

to cellular licensees only if they offer

real-time, two-way switched voice or

data service that is interconnected with

the public switched network and that

utilizes an in-network switching facility

that enables the provider to reuse

69894 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules

frequencies and accomplish seamless

hand-offs of subscriber calls. Although

the Commission does not have

definitive information, we estimate that

most or all small business cellular

licensees offer services meeting this

description.

Estimates for Broadband PCS Licensees

23. The broadband PCS spectrum is

divided into six frequency blocks

designated A through F, and the

Commission has held auctions for each

block. The Commission defined ‘‘small

entity’’ for Blocks C and F as an entity

that has average gross revenues of less

than $40 million or less in the three

previous calendar years. For Block F, an

additional classification for ‘‘very small

business’’ was added and is defined as

an entity that, together with its affiliates,

has average gross revenues of not more

than $15 million for the preceding three

calendar years. These regulations

defining ‘‘small entity’’ in the context of

broadband PCS auctions have been

approved by the SBA. No small

businesses within the SBA-approved

definition bid successfully for licenses

in Blocks A and B. There were 90

winning bidders that qualified as small

entities in the Block C auctions. A total

of 93 small and very small business

bidders won approximately 40 percent

of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and

F. Based on this information, we

conclude that the number of small

broadband PCS licensees will include

the 90 winning C Block bidders and the

93 qualifying bidders in the D, E, and F

blocks, for a total of 183 small entity

PCS providers as defined by the SBA

and the Commission’s auction rules.

24. Any rule modifications that will

be made pursuant to this proceeding

will apply to broadband PCS licensees

only if they offer real-time, two-way

switched voice or data service that is

interconnected with the public switched

network and that utilizes an in-network

switching facility that enables the

provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls. Although the

Commission does not have definitive

information, we estimate that most or all

small business broadband PCS licensees

offer services meeting this description.

Estimates for SMR Licensees

25. Pursuant to 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1),

the Commission has defined ‘‘small

business’’ for purposes of auctioning

900 MHz SMR licenses, 800 MHz SMR

licenses for the upper 200 channels, and

800 MHz SMR licenses for the lower

230 channels as a firm that has had

average annual gross revenues of $15

million or less in the three preceding

calendar years. This small business size

standard for the 800 MHz and 900 MHz

auctions has been approved by the SBA.

Any rules adopted pursuant to this

NPRM will apply to SMR licensees only

if they offer real-time, two-way switched

voice or data service that is

interconnected with the public switched

network and that utilizes an in-network

switching facility that enables the

provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls. Although the

Commission does not have definitive

information, we estimate that very few

small business, incumbent site-by-site

SMR licensees offer services meeting

this description. Geographic licensees

are considered more likely to offer such

services. In all cases, we provide

estimates below that are conservative so

as to not underestimate the impact on

small entities.

26. Sixty winning bidders for

geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz

SMR band qualified as small businesses

under the $15 million size standard. We

do not know which of these licensees

will offer real-time, two-way switched

voice or data service that is

interconnected with the public switched

network and that utilizes an in-network

switching facility that enables the

provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls. We conservatively

estimate that the number of small

business 900 MHz SMR geographic area

licensees that could be affected by rule

modifications is 60 or fewer.

27. The auction of the 525 800 MHz

SMR geographic area licenses for the

upper 200 channels began on October

28, 1997, and was completed on

December 8, 1997. Ten (10) winning

bidders for geographic area licenses for

the upper 200 channels in the 800 MHz

SMR band qualified as small businesses

under the $15 million size standard. We

do not know which of these licensees

will offer real-time, two-way switched

voice or data service that is

interconnected with the public switched

network and that utilizes an in-network

switching facility that enables the

provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls. Therefore, we

conservatively estimate that the number

of small business 800 MHz SMR

geographic area licensees for the upper

200 channels that could be affected by

rule modifications is ten or fewer.

28. The Commission anticipates that a

total of 3,853 EA licenses will be

auctioned in the lower 230 channels of

the 800 MHz SMR service. This figure

is derived by multiplying the total

number of Economic Areas (EAs) (175)

by the number of channel blocks (22) in

the lower 230 channels. Three

additional upper band channels will be

licensed as well. No party submitting or

commenting on the petitions for

reconsideration giving rise to our

Reconsideration of October 8, 1999,

commented on the potential number of

small entities that might participate in

the auction of the lower 230 channels

and no reasonable estimate can be

made. Therefore, we conclude that the

number of 800 MHz SMR geographic

area licensees for the lower 230

channels that may ultimately be affected

by this rule modification could be as

many as 3,853.

29. With respect to licensees

operating under extended

implementation authorizations, by

November 1997 thirty-three licensees

with extended implementation

authority in the 800 MHz SMR Service

were granted two years two complete

the buildout of their systems. At this

time, our records indicate that twentyseven licensees with extended

implementation authority still exist, but

there may be as few as twenty-two

remaining as independent entities. The

Commission will soon receive filings

that will clarify the situation. Until

then, we will assume that there are

twenty-seven remaining licensees in

this category and that they all qualify as

small businesses utilizing the SBA’s

wireless size standard of $15 million or

less. However, we do not know how

many of these licensees offer real-time,

two-way switched voice or data service

that is interconnected with the public

switched network and that utilizes an

in-network switching facility that

enables the provider to reuse

frequencies and accomplish seamless

hand-offs of subscriber calls. Therefore,

estimating conservatively, we conclude

that the number of small business SMR

licensees operating in the 800 MHz and

900 MHz bands under extended

implementation authorizations that

could be affected by a rule modification

is up to 27 entities.

30. The Commission does not have an

accurate estimate of the number of

incumbent site-by-site SMR licensees,

and a reliable figure will not be

available until the SMR site-by-site

licensees migrate to the Universal

Licensing System. Making this estimate

is complicated by the number of recent

transactions that have occurred in the

800 MHz SMR service. However, our

task is also greatly simplified for

purposes of this regulatory flexibility

analysis because we are looking for a

very specific type of SMR licensee. That

is, the licensee must: first, qualify as a

small business (i.e., average annual

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules 69895

1 5 U.S.C. 603(c).

gross revenues of $15 million or less in

the three preceding calendar years);

second, offer real-time, two-way

switched voice or data service that is

interconnected with the public switched

network; and third, use an in-network

switching facility that enables the

provider to reuse frequencies and

accomplish seamless hand-offs of

subscriber calls. These criteria greatly

restrict the number of SMR providers

who could be affected by this new rule.

Although there may be SMR carriers

who provide such services it is high

unlikely that they will be small entities

or small businesses given the nature of

the SMR providers and the development

of that industry. Consequently, even

though there may be no licensees that

satisfy these criteria, we err on the sake

of caution and conclude that 25 small

entities may fall into this category.

D. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other

Compliance Requirements

31. We anticipate that any rules that

may be adopted pursuant to this NPRM

will impose no reporting or

recordkeeping requirements. The only

compliance costs likely to be incurred,

as a result, are administrative costs to

ensure that an entity’s practices are in

compliance with the rule. The only

compliance requirement of the new

rules is that licensees subject to any

automatic roaming requirement (i.e.,

cellular licensees, broadband PCS

licensees, and geographic area 800 MHz

and 900 MHz SMR licensees that offer

real-time, two-way, interconnected

switched voice and data service) would

have to provide non-discriminatory

access to their wireless systems via

automatic roaming once they had

reached an agreement with any carrier

to permit automatic roaming. As noted

above in this Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis, and in the text of

the NPRM, we seek comment on the

potential costs of implementing an

automatic roaming requirement in this

context, including such potential costs

on small business.

E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and

Significant Alternatives Considered

32. The RFA requires an agency to

describe any significant alternatives that

it has considered in reaching its

proposed approach, which may include

the following four alternatives (among

others): (1) the establishment of

differing compliance or reporting

requirements or timetables that take into

account the resources available to small

entities; (2) the clarification,

consolidation, or simplification of

compliance or reporting requirements

under the rule for small entities; (3) the

use of performance, rather than design,

standards; and (4) an exemption from

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof,

for small entities.1

33. As noted, the possible sunset of

the manual roaming rule, if adopted,

would be expected to reduce any

existing economic impact on small

business. Therefore, the only possible

negative economic impacts that might

arise from this NPRM are those that

would be associated with an

‘‘automatic’’ roaming rule.

34. As indicated in the NPRM, were

the Commission to propose an

‘‘automatic’’ roaming rule, the

subscribers of any carrier requesting that

another carrier enter a

nondiscriminatory automatic roaming

arrangement would have the burden of

ensuring that its subscribers were using

equipment that is technically capable of

accessing the roamed-on carrier’s

network. Thus, to the extent the

roamed-on carrier’s network were that

of a smaller carrier, the economic

burden of having equipment technically

capable of accessing the network would

not fall on the smaller carrier. Also, we

note that an automatic roaming rule, if

adopted, would not require a small

business to modify its network to

accommodate automatic roaming.

35. In this NPRM, the Commission

also specifically has requested

comments from small businesses that

would provide information on the

extent to which such a rule would

impose costs and administrative

burdens on them. For instance, we

inquire whether the costs of such a rule

would impact smaller carriers

disproportionately, such that we should

fashion the rule to reach only the larger

providers. The Commission will draw

on this information when considering

whether a rule should be promulgated,

and if so, how it can best be drafted to

minimize any costs placed on small

businesses. Furthermore, we inquire

whether adoption of an ‘‘automatic

roaming’’ rule would in fact be in the

best interests of small businesses.

Specifically, in considering whether or

not to adopt an ‘‘automatic roaming’’

rule, we inquire of smaller carriers

whether such a rule would be most

beneficial to such carriers to the extent

they may have difficulty obtaining

agreements from larger carriers absent

such a rule.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed

Rules

None.

Ordering Clauses

36. Pursuant to the authority of

Sections 1, 2(a), 4(i), 4(j), 201(b), 251(a),

253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i),

154(j), 201(b), 251(a), 253, 303(r), and

332(c)(1)(B), and §§ 1.411 and 1.412 of

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.411

and 1.412, this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking is Adopted.

37. The Commission’s Consumer

Information Bureau, Reference

Information Center, shall send a copy of

this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,

including the Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

Communications common carriers,

Communications equipment.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–29773 Filed 11–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

48 CFR Part 215

Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement; Profit Policy

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Director of Defense

Procurement is sponsoring a public

meeting to discuss the proposed Defense

Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS) rule on changes to

profit policy published in the Federal

Register at 65 FR 45574 on July 24,

2000. The Director of Defense

Procurement would like to hear the

views of interested parties on what they

believe to be the key issues pertaining

to the proposed rule and potential

alternatives. A listing of some of the

possible issues is included on the

Internet Home Page of the Office of Cost,

Pricing, and Finance at http://

www.acq.osd.mil/dp/cpf.

Subsequent to the discussions at the

public meeting, the Director of Defense

Procurement intends to publish a

revised proposed rule for additional

public comment.

DATES: The public meeting will be

conducted at the address shown below

on December 12, 2000, from 9 a.m. to 12

p.m., local time.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be

conducted at Crystal Square 4, Suite