11614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

180.940(c). The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because it 

is not required for the establishment of 

a tolerance exemption for inert 

ingredients. Contact: RD. 

5. PP 4F8287. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2015– 

0023). CP Bio, Inc., 4802 Murrieta 

Street, Chino, CA 91710, requests to 

establish an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

part 180 for residues of the biochemical 

plant growth regulator, Choline 

Chloride (Acetyl Choline), in or on all 

raw agricultural commodities, when 

applied pre-harvest. The analytical 

method High-Performance Liquid 

Chromatographic (HPLC) Analysis is 

available to EPA for the detection and 

measurement of the pesticide residue. 

Contact: BPPD. 

6. PP 4F8292. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2015– 

0017). Suterra LLC, 20950 NE Talus 

Place, Bend, OR 97701, requests to 

establish an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

part 180 for residues of the arthropod 

pheromone, lavandulyl senecioate, in or 

on all raw agricultural commodities 

when applied to growing crops at a rate 

not to exceed 150 grams active 

ingredient/acre/year in accordance with 

good agricultural practices. The 

petitioner believes no analytical method 

is needed because significant residues of 

the pheromone active ingredient are not 

possible if use rates are limited to 150 

grams pheromone active ingredient per 

acre per year. Contact: BPPD. 

7. PP 4F8313. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2014– 

0896). Technology Sciences Group, Inc., 

712 Fifth St., Suite A, Davis, CA 95616 

(on behalf of EctoPharma Ltd., Dunsdale 

Rd., Selkirk, TD7 5EB, United 

Kingdom), requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the insecticide, 1,2- 

Octanediol, in or on all food 

commodities. The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because it 

is expected that when the pesticide 

containing 1,2-Octanediol is used as 

proposed, it would not result in 

residues that are of toxicological 

concern. Contact: BPPD. 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a. 

Dated: February 18, 2015. 

Susan T. Lewis, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04281 Filed 3–3–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 74 

[WT Docket No. 15–36; FCC 15–22] 

Permitting Remote Pickup Broadcast 

Auxiliary Stations To Utilize Modern 

Digital Technologies 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) seeks comment on its 

proposal to permit broadcasters to use 

modern digital technologies for Remote 

Pickup operations. Permitting this 

would further the Commission’s goal of 

enabling broadcasters to use the same 

digital technologies for Remote Pickup 

operations as used by operators in the 

Private Land Mobile Radio Service. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

April 3, 2015. Submit reply comments 

on or before April 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WT Docket No. 15–36, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS): http://fcc.gov/

ecfs//. Follow the instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail): Federal 

Communications Commission, 9300 

East Hampton Dr., Capitol Heights, MD 

20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service (First-class, 

Express, and Priority): Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

St. SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

• Hand-delivered/Courier: Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

St. SW., Room TW–A325, Washington, 

DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. 

to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 

held together with rubber bands or 

fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 

must be disposed of before entering the 

building. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN) for the 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://fcc.gov/ecfs//, 

including any personal information 

provided. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading 

of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/

FCC-15-22A1.docx. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, please contact 

Nancy Zaczek of the Wireless 

Telecommunications Bureau, 

Broadband Division, at (202) 418–0274 

or email to nancy.zaczek@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking and Order, WT 

Docket No. 15–36, RM–11648, and RM 

11649 adopted on February 13, 2015 

and released on February 18, 2015. The 

complete text of this document will be 

available for public inspection during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center (CY–A257) at the 

Federal Communications Commission, 

445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 

20554. Documents will be available 

electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, 

and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete 

text of this document will also be 

available via ECFS. 

Public Participation 

Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121 (1998). 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (tty). 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 11615 

I. Order—Remote Pickup (RPU) Center 

Frequencies 

A. Background 

1. RPU stations may be authorized to 

operate within the 25.67–26.48 MHz 

band (HF RPU Band), the 152.855–154 

MHz, 157.45–161.575 MHz, 161.625– 

161.775 MHz bands (collectively, VHF 

RPU Band), and the 450–451 MHz and 

455–456 MHz bands (collectively, UHF 

RPU Band). These frequencies are also 

either available for assignment in the 

part 90 Private Land Mobile Radio 

Service (PLMRS) or are near frequencies 

available for PLMRS use. When the 

Commission established the current 

RPU service rules in 2002, its goal was 

to harmonize the RPU technical 

standards with the part 90 rules so that 

broadcasters could use radios developed 

for part 90 PLMRS use for RPU use, 

particularly for dispatch and operational 

traffic. At the same time, the 

Commission recognized that part 90 

narrowband radios may not be suitable 

for transmitting audio program feeds, 

which require greater bandwidth to 

support high audio quality with no 

delay. Accordingly, the Commission 

allowed broadcasters to stack multiple 

RPU channel segments to create wider 

channels. Under the current rules, the 

VHF RPU and UHF RPU Bands are 

divided into segments with designated 

channel centers, but broadcasters may 

combine multiple segments to form 

wider RPU channels so long as they 

comply with the applicable bandwidth 

and emission requirements. 

Broadcasters using RPU stations to 

transmit program material have primary 

use of the wider channels. 

2. The Engineers for the Integrity of 

Broadcast Auxiliary Services Spectrum 

(EIBASS) and the Society for Broadcast 

Engineers (SBE) have separately 

identified two obstacles that they argue 

have prevented broadcasters from using 

PLMRS equipment for RPU use in the 

VHF RPU and UHF RPU Bands. The 

first obstacle concerns a mismatch 

between PLMRS equipment and the 

channel centers for RPU stations 

specified in the Commission’s rules. For 

analog equipment, the 25 kilohertz 

channel centers listed for RPU stations 

in the Commission’s rules cannot be 

programmed into analog part 90 PLMRS 

equipment used by broadcasters. If a 

broadcaster attempted to combine four 

6.25 kilohertz segments to form a 25 

kilohertz RPU channel, the center 

frequency of the resultant channel 

would be offset from the RPU channel 

centers specified in the Commission’s 

rules. Under this scenario, the only way 

to create an RPU channel with a center 

frequency that is specified in the 

Commission’s rules is to request an odd 

number of RPU segments (i.e., request 

an extra segment). Furthermore, while 

digital equipment can tune to the 

nearest Hertz, many, if not most, analog 

radios now in use cannot program 

frequencies with that degree of 

accuracy. 

B. Discussion 

3. As described above, EIBASS and 

SBE identify two issues relating to the 

designation of center frequencies for 

RPU stations: (1) The fact that when an 

applicant combines an even number of 

channels, the center frequency for the 

combined channels will fall in between 

frequencies listed in the Commission’s 

rules; and (2) the inability of analog 

equipment to specify the center 

frequency with the level of precision set 

forth in the Commission’s rules. With 

the clarification and guidance provided 

below, we conclude that no rule 

changes are necessary to address either 

of these issues. 

4. We find that existing § 74.402 of the 

Commission’s rules address the first 

issue. In its preamble, that rule 

provides, ‘‘When an even number of 

channels are stacked in those sections 

[where] stacking is permitted, channel 

assignments may be made for the 

frequency halfway between those 

listed.’’ Thus, to use EIBASS’ example, 

a broadcaster wishing to combine the 

6.25 kilohertz segments centered 

455.48750 MHz, 455.49375 MHz, 

455.50000 MHz, and 455.50625 MHz 

into a 25 kilohertz RPU channel could 

specify 455.496875 MHz as the center 

frequency of the combined segments 

because it is halfway between 455.49375 

MHz and 455.5 MHz. Consistent with 

§ 74.402, the current process of the 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 

has been to require applicants to stack 

the minimum number of segments 

necessary to accommodate the 

applicant’s bandwidth needs. 

Applications that stack an odd number 

of segments must specify a center 

frequency consistent with the center of 

the segments listed in § 74.402, and 

applications that stack an even number 

of segments must specify a center 

frequency that falls in between the 

channel centers listed in § 74.402. The 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 

will continue to process applications 

specifying an even number of segments 

consistent with this interpretation of 

§ 74.402. 

5. With respect to the inability of 

analog equipment to precisely specify 

frequencies to six decimal places, no 

transmitter can operate on a specific 

frequency with absolute precision. The 

Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) rules 

recognize this limitation by establishing 

permissible frequency tolerances for 

RPU equipment. In the VHF RPU Band, 

the tightest applicable frequency 

stability requirement is one part per 

million, which translates into an 

acceptable deviation of approximately 

150 Hertz on those frequencies. For the 

UHF RPU Band, the tightest applicable 

frequency stability requirement is .5 

parts per million, which translates into 

an acceptable deviation of 

approximately 225 Hertz on those 

frequencies. We note that the channel 

centers listed in the rules specify some 

frequencies in the UHF RPU Band to the 

nearest 10 Hertz, and neither EIBASS 

nor SBE has claimed that analog 

equipment cannot program those 

frequencies. So long as licensees comply 

with the applicable emission masks as 

measured from the center frequency 

specified in the authorization, and the 

licensee programs the center frequency 

as closely to the specified center 

frequency as the equipment will allow, 

we would view a licensee as being in 

compliance with the center frequency 

requirements of § 74.402 of the 

Commission’s rules for the VHF RPU 

Band and UHF RPU Band. 

II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

A. RPU Digital Emissions and 

Modulation Requirements 

6. SBE and EIBASS point out another 

obstacle to using PLMRS equipment for 

RPU purposes, specifically the lack of 

authorization in the rules for use of 

specific digital technologies. SBE and 

EIBASS identify Time Division Multiple 

Access (TDMA), Next Generation Digital 

Network (NXDN), ANSI/TIA–102A 

(Project 25), Trans-European Trunked 

Radio (TETRA), Digital Private Mobile 

Radio (dPMR), and Digital Mobile Radio 

(DMR) as digital technologies used in 

PLMRS radios that could be suitable for 

RPU use. Section 74.462 of the 

Commission’s rules ‘‘requires that the 

‘equipment shall be operated in 

accordance with emissions 

specifications included in the grant of 

the certification and as prescribed in 

. . . this section’’ and lists the 

authorized emissions for RPU stations. 

The only emissions currently authorized 

by the rule, however, are all analog 

emissions. No digital emissions are 

included in the list of authorized 

emissions. 

7. We propose to change our rules to 

allow broadcasters to use modern digital 

technologies such as TDMA and NXDN 

for RPU operations. We believe it would 

be in the public interest to give 

broadcasters the opportunity to use the 

same digital technologies for RPU 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11616 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

stations as those used by part 90 PLMRS 

licensees. The Commission’s intent in 

2002 was to harmonize the RPU 

technical standards with the part 90 

rules so that broadcasters could use 

radios developed for part 90 PLMRS 

use, particularly for dispatch and 

operational traffic. By allowing 

broadcasters to use the same digital 

technologies for RPU stations as those 

used by PLMRS licensees, we would 

further that goal and allow broadcasters 

to use equipment and technologies 

developed for PLMRS. We seek 

comment on the costs and benefits and 

advantages or disadvantages of allowing 

broadcasters to use the digital 

technology of their choice in the VHF 

and UHF RPU Bands. 

8. SBE and EIBASS each propose that 

we amend § 74.462 of the Commission’s 

rules to permit RPU stations to use any 

digital emissions that meets the 

applicable emissions mask and 

bandwidth limitations. We seek 

comment on amending § 74.462 in that 

fashion. We note that while SBE and 

EIBASS focus on the VHF and UHF RPU 

Bands, the proposed rule change would 

also allow digital emissions in the HF 

RPU Band. We seek comment on 

whether it is appropriate to also allow 

digital emissions in the HF RPU Band. 

We also seek comment on alternative 

means of amending our rules to reach 

the same result requested by EIBASS 

and SBE. Further, we seek comment on 

amending § 74.462 to specify a 

maximum authorized bandwidth of 50 

kilohertz in the 450.03125–450.61875 

MHz and 455.03125 455.061875 MHz 

bands, as opposed to the maximum 

authorized bandwidth of 25 kilohertz 

currently in the rule. This change would 

make § 74.462 consistent with 

§ 74.402(b) of the Commission’s rules, 

which allows up to eight 6.25 kilohertz 

segments to be stacked for a total RPU 

channel bandwidth of 50 kilohertz. We 

seek comment on the costs and benefits 

and advantages or disadvantages of the 

various proposed approaches. 

9. We also seek comment on EIBASS’s 

request that we amend § 74.463 of the 

Commission’s rules to explicitly add the 

phrase ‘‘digital modulation’’. We seek 

comment on the proposed rule language 

and its attendant costs and benefits, and 

on any alternatives and their associated 

costs and benefits. 

B. Station Identification Requirements 

10. In addition, we seek comment on 

what changes to our station 

identification requirements are needed 

to accommodate digital RPU operations. 

EIBASS recommends that we amend the 

station identification requirements in 

§ 74.482 of the Commission’s rules to 

cover all forms of commercially 

available digital land mobile radios, 

using language that is broad enough to 

cover new forms of digital signals as 

they are developed. Although EIBASS 

specifically recommends that we adopt 

a method of identifying stations that 

uses a watermark ID, such as the 

protocol adopted in the Advanced 

Television Systems Committee (ATSC) 

A/82 Data Return Link (DRL) standard, 

it stresses that is more important that we 

adopt the same protocol for both RPU 

BAS and PLMRS stations. In 2010, the 

Commission sought comment on 

amending the PLMRS rules to allow 

station identification in the 150–170 

MHz and 450–470 MHz bands in digital 

format. The proposed rule language in 

that proceeding would allow PLMRS 

stations to digitally transmit their call 

signs, subject to the requirement that the 

licensees provide the Commission with 

the means to decode the digital 

transmission. Adopting the same station 

identification rules for both RPU BAS 

and PLMRS stations, EIBASS argues, 

would enable RPU broadcasters to 

purchase COTS two-way radios whose 

transmissions could be universally 

decoded to identify interfering 

transmitters. Should we adopt the 

requirements proposed by the 

Commission in 2010 for PLMRS 

stations, or should the Commission 

adopt a specific standard, such as the A/ 

82 DRL standard? Commenters should 

provide information on the costs and 

benefits and advantages or 

disadvantages of the different 

approaches. 

C. 100 Kilohertz RPU Channels 

11. SBE also raises a different but 

related issue with regard to § 74.402 of 

the Commission’s rules. Specifically, 

SBE believes there is no current need for 

new RPU stations with a 100 kilohertz 

bandwidth. It therefore proposes that no 

new RPU stations proposing a 100 

kilohertz bandwidth be authorized 

absent a showing of need in individual 

cases. SBE believes that existing 100 

kilohertz RPU stations should be 

grandfathered. 

12. Consistent with SBE’s request, we 

propose to modify § 74.402 to eliminate 

a licensee’s ability to create 100 

kilohertz RPU channels in the future. 

Given the relatively small amount of 

spectrum available for RPU operations, 

and that the 100 kilohertz channels 

overlap the narrower channels, a license 

specifying 100 kilohertz bandwidth can 

make it difficult for other broadcasters 

to obtain spectrum for narrowband RPU 

operations, which are much more 

prevalent than 100 kilohertz operations. 

We note that in the past four years, the 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 

has received only one application 

requesting authorization for a 100 

kilohertz bandwidth RPU channel. 

Accordingly, there appears to be little 

need for licenses with 100 kilohertz 

channels. If we eliminate the ability to 

create these channels, applicants would 

still be able to apply via a waiver of the 

rules to use 100 kilohertz channels. We 

emphasize that we are not proposing to 

change the rights of existing licensees 

with 100 kilohertz bandwidth RPU 

channels. Instead, we propose to 

grandfather existing licensees with 100 

kilohertz RPU channel authorizations. 

These licensees will be permitted to 

renew their authorizations indefinitely 

and will be allowed to make 

modifications to their existing 

authorization without affecting their 

grandfathered status. We seek comment 

on these proposals, as well as their 

associated costs and benefits. 

III. Waiver Request 

13. SBE also seeks a temporary waiver 

of § 74.462 of the Commission’s rules to 

permit broadcasters to use FCC-certified 

narrowband VHF and UHF RPU 

equipment, such as TDMA technology 

or NXDN technology, in the VHF and 

UHF RPU Bands while the rulemaking 

is pending. The Commission’s rules 

provide that waivers will be granted if 

the petitioner shows that: (i) The 

underlying purpose of the rules(s) 

would not be served or would be 

frustrated by application to the instant 

case, and that a grant of the requested 

waiver would be in the public interest; 

or (ii) in view of the unique or unusual 

factual circumstances of the instant 

case, application of the rule(s) would be 

inequitable, unduly burdensome or 

contrary to the public interest, or the 

applicant has no reasonable alternative. 

14. We decline to grant a blanket 

waiver of § 74.462 to permit use of 

digital emissions in the VHF and UHF 

RPU Bands while this rulemaking is 

pending. While we agree with SBE that 

it appears to be in the public interest to 

empower RPU broadcasters to use 

digital technologies, the instant 

rulemaking is designed to provide an 

opportunity for meaningful comment on 

this assessment and on important 

details about the implementation of 

such digital operations. For example, it 

is not clear based on the current record 

how broadcasters using digital 

equipment will comply with the station 

identification requirement. If we were to 

grant a general waiver, broadcasters 

might use any type of digital RPU 

equipment, some or all of which might 

be incompatible with the requirements 

that the Commission ultimately adopts. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 11617 

Therefore, until the Commission has 

established rules for implementation of 

digital technologies in the VHF and 

UHF, and perhaps HF RPU Bands, we 

do not find it to be in the public interest 

to grant broadcasters a general waiver to 

do so. Under these circumstances, we 

believe the better course of action is to 

proceed through the rulemaking process 

and establish rules that all broadcasters 

can rely on going forward. Our denial of 

SBE’s request for a general waiver does 

not preclude a broadcaster from 

invoking the Commission’s waiver rules 

in a specific case in order to request 

appropriate individualized relief. Such 

cases will be considered on an ad hoc 

basis. 

IV. Procedural Matters 

A. Ex Parte Rules—Permit-but-Disclose 

Proceeding 

15. Pursuant to § 1.1200(a) of the 

Commission’s rules, the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking and Order shall 

be treated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ 

proceeding in accordance with the 

Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons 

making ex parte presentations must file 

a copy of any written presentation or a 

memorandum summarizing any oral 

presentation within two business days 

after the presentation (unless a different 

deadline applicable to the Sunshine 

period applies). Persons making oral ex 

parte presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentation must (1) list all persons 

attending or otherwise participating in 

the meeting at which the ex parte 

presentation was made, and (2) 

summarize all data presented and 

arguments made during the 

presentation. If the presentation 

consisted in whole or in part of the 

presentation of data or arguments 

already reflected in the presenter’s 

written comments, memoranda or other 

filings in the proceeding, the presenter 

may provide citations to such data or 

arguments in his or her prior comments, 

memoranda, or other filings (specifying 

the relevant page and/or paragraph 

numbers where such data or arguments 

can be found) in lieu of summarizing 

them in the memorandum. Documents 

shown or given to Commission staff 

during ex parte meetings are deemed to 

be written ex parte presentations and 

must be filed consistent with rule 

§ 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 

rule § 1.49(f) or for which the 

Commission has made available a 

method of electronic filing, written ex 

parte presentations and memoranda 

summarizing oral ex parte 

presentations, and all attachments 

thereto, must be filed through the 

electronic comment filing system 

available for that proceeding, and must 

be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, 

.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants 

in this proceeding should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Analysis 

16. This document does not contain 

proposed information collection(s) 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In 

addition, therefore, it does not contain 

any new or modified ‘‘information 

collection burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 

employees,’’ pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

C. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

17. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA), the Commission has prepared 

this present Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 

possible significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities by 

the policies and rules proposed in this 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). 

Written public comments are requested 

on this IRFA. Comments must be 

identified as responses to the IRFA and 

must be filed by the deadlines specified 

in the NPRM for comments. The 

Commission will send a copy of this 

NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA). In 

addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

D. Need for, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rules 

18. In the NPRM, we propose to 

amend our rules to allow broadcasters to 

use any type of digital equipment. In 

addition, permitting digital emissions in 

the RPU bands may also require us to 

amend §§ 74.402, 74.462, and 74.482 of 

the Commission’s rules. These changes 

are supported by the commenters and 

will give RPU licensees the flexibility to 

choose from a wide variety of ‘‘off-theshelf’’ digital equipment, which will, in 

turn, encourage RPU licensees to 

convert to digital systems and increase 

spectrum efficiency. 

E. Legal Basis 

19. The proposed action is authorized 

pursuant to sections 4 and 303 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, and 

§ 1.411 of the Commission’s rules, 47 

CFR 1.411. 

F. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities To Which the 

Proposed Rules Will Apply 

20. The RFA directs agencies to 

provide a description of, and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities that may be affected by 

the proposed rules and policies, if 

adopted. The RFA generally defines the 

term ‘‘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 

SBA. 

21. The proposals in the NPRM would 

affect BAS RPU licensees. Only 

licensees of broadcast stations, 

broadcast networks, and cable networks 

can hold RPU licenses. Additionally, 

the proposals affect manufacturers of 

equipment that supports the BAS 

Remote Pickup Service. BAS involves a 

variety of transmitters, generally used to 

relay broadcast programming to the 

public (through translator and booster 

stations) or within the program 

distribution chain (from a remote news 

gathering unit to the studio or from the 

studio to the transmitter). The 

Commission has not developed a 

definition of small entities applicable to 

these licensees. Therefore, the 

applicable definitions of small entities 

for each of these services under the SBA 

rules is as follows: for Remote pickup 

BAS we will use SIC code 4833 when 

used by a TV station or 4832 when used 

by a radio station and for BAS 

equipment manufacturers, we will use 

SIC code 3663 (Radio and Television 

Broadcasting and Communications 

Equipment) which are classified as 

small businesses if they employ no more 

than 750 people. 

G. Radio Broadcasting 

22. The subject rules and policies 

potentially will apply to all AM and FM 

radio broadcasting licensees and 

potential licensees. A radio broadcasting 

station is an establishment primarily 

engaged in broadcasting aural programs 

by radio to the public. Included in this 

industry are commercial, religious, 

educational, and other radio stations. 

Radio broadcasting stations, which 

primarily are engaged in radio 

broadcasting, and produce radio 

program materials are similarly 

included. However, radio stations that 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11618 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

are separate establishments and are 

primarily engaged in producing radio 

program material are classified under 

another NAICS number. The SBA has 

established a small business size 

standard for this category, which is: 

firms having $7 million or less in 

annual receipts. According to 

Commission staff review of the BIA 

Publications, Inc. Master Access Radio 

Analyzer Database as of August 2, 2013, 

about 10,811 (97 percent) of 11,162 

commercial radio station have revenues 

of $7 million or less and thus qualify as 

small entities under the SBA definition. 

Therefore, the majority of such entities 

are small entities. We note, however, 

that many radio stations are affiliated 

with much larger corporations having 

much higher revenue. Our estimate, 

therefore, likely overstates the number 

of small entities that might be affected 

by any ultimate changes to the rules and 

forms. 

H. Television Broadcasting 

23. This economic census category 

‘‘comprises establishments primarily 

engaged in broadcasting images together 

with sound. These establishments 

operate television broadcasting studios 

and facilities for the programming and 

transmission of programs to the public.’’ 

The SBA has created the following 

small business size standard for 

Television Broadcasting firms: those 

having $14 million or less in annual 

receipts. The Commission has estimated 

the number of licensed commercial 

television stations to be 1,388. In 

addition, according to Commission staff 

review of the BIA Advisory Services, 

LLC’s Media Access Pro Television 

Database on March 28, 2012, about 950 

of an estimated 1,300 commercial 

television stations (or approximately 73 

percent) had revenues of $14 million or 

less. We therefore estimate that the 

majority of commercial television 

broadcasters are small entities. 

24. We note, however, that in 

assessing whether a business concern 

qualifies as small under the above 

definition, business (control) affiliations 

must be included. Our estimate, 

therefore, likely overstates the number 

of small entities that might be affected 

by our action because the revenue figure 

on which it is based does not include or 

aggregate revenues from affiliated 

companies. In addition, an element of 

the definition of ‘‘small business’’ is that 

the entity not be dominant in its field 

of operation. We are unable at this time 

to define or quantify the criteria that 

would establish whether a specific 

television station is dominant in its field 

of operation. Accordingly, the estimate 

of small businesses to which rules may 

apply does not exclude any television 

station from the definition of a small 

business on this basis and is therefore 

possibly over-inclusive to that extent. 

25. In addition, the Commission has 

estimated the number of licensed 

noncommercial educational (‘‘NCE’’) 

television stations to be 396. These 

stations are non-profit, and therefore 

considered to be small entities. 

26. There are also 2,414 LPTV 

stations, including Class A stations, and 

4,046 TV translator stations. Given the 

nature of these services, we will 

presume that all of these entities qualify 

as small entities under the above SBA 

small business size standard. 

I. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

27. The NPRM proposes no new 

reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. 

J. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

28. 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. 

29. The actions proposed in the 

NPRM would give RPU licensees the 

flexibility to use off-the-shelf digital 

equipment, thus reducing their costs. 

This action will serve the public interest 

by enabling RPU licensees to use 

spectrum more efficiently. The rules 

will therefore open up beneficial 

economic opportunities to a variety of 

spectrum users, including small 

businesses. Because the actions 

proposed in the NPRM will improve 

beneficial economic opportunities for 

all businesses, including small 

businesses, a detailed discussion of 

alternatives is not required. 

30. Generally, the alternative 

approach would be to maintain the 

existing rules. Under that approach, 

however, Remote Pickup Service 

licensees would not have the 

opportunity to use digital off-the-shelf 

equipment. 

K. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rules 

31. None. 

V. Ordering Clauses 

32. Accordingly, it is ordered, 

pursuant to sections 4 and 303 of the 

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

154, 303, and § 1.411 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.411, that 

the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 

hereby adopted. 

33. It is further ordered, pursuant to 

sections 4 and 303 of the 

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

154, 303, and § 1.407 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.407, that 

the petitions for rulemaking filed by the 

Engineers for the Integrity of Broadcast 

Auxiliary Services on October 7, 2011 

and by Society of Broadcast Engineers, 

Incorporated on November 7, 2011 are 

granted to the extent indicated herein 

and are otherwise denied. 

34. For the reasons stated above, it is 

further ordered, pursuant to section 4(i) 

of the Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), and 

§ 1.925(b)(3) of the Commission’s rules, 

47 CFR 1.925(b)(3), that the waiver 

request filed by the Society for 

Broadcast Engineers on November 7, 

2011 is denied. 

35. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

the NPRM, including the IRFA, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 74 

Communications equipment. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Sheryl D. Todd, 

Deputy Secretary. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 74 as follows: 

PART 74—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, 

AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST 

AND OTHER PROGRAM 

DISTRIBUTION SERVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 74 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 

309, 336 and 554. 

■ 2. Amend § 74.402 by revising the 

introductory text in paragraph (d) to 

read as follows: 

§ 74.402 Frequency assignment. 

* * * * * 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 42 / Wednesday, March 4, 2015 / Proposed Rules 11619 

(d) Up to two of the following 50 

kilohertz segments may be stacked to 

form a channel which may be assigned 

for use by broadcast remote pickup 

stations using any emission contained 

within the resultant channel in 

accordance with the provisions of 

§ 74.462. Users committed to 100 

kilohertz bandwidths and transmitting 

program material will have primary use 

of these channels. After [insert effective 

date of rule], initial authorizations with 

100 kilohertz bandwidth will not be 

issued. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 74.462 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: 

§ 74.462 Authorized Bandwidth and 

Emissions. 

(a) Each authorization for a new 

remote pickup broadcast station or 

system shall require the use of 

certificated equipment and such 

equipment shall be operated in 

accordance with emission specifications 

included in the grant of certification and 

as prescribed in paragraphs (b), (c), and 

(d) of this section. Any form of 

modulation may be used. 

(b) The maximum authorized 

bandwidth of emissions corresponding 

to the types of emissions specified 

below, and the maximum authorized 

frequency deviation in the case of 

frequency or phase modulated emission, 

shall be as follows: 

Frequencies 

Maximum 

authorized 

bandwidth 

(kilohertz) 

Maximum 

frequency 

deviation 

(kilohertz) 1

MHz: 

25.87 to 26.03 .............................................................................................................................................. 40 10 

26.07 to 26.47 .............................................................................................................................................. 20 5 

152.8625 to 153.3575 2 ............................................................................................................................... 30/60 5/10 

160.860 to 161.400 ...................................................................................................................................... 60 10 

161.625 to 161.775 ...................................................................................................................................... 30 5 

166.25 and 170.15 3 .................................................................................................................................... 12.5 2.5 

450.00625 to 450.99375 .............................................................................................................................. 25 5 

455.00625 to 455.99375 .............................................................................................................................. 25 5 

450.03125 to 450.61875 .............................................................................................................................. 50 

455.03125 to 455.61875 .............................................................................................................................. 50 5 

450.6375 to 450.8625.

455.6375 to 455.8625 .................................................................................................................................. 50 10 

450.900, 450.950.

455.900, 455.950 4 ....................................................................................................................................... 100 35 

1Applies where F1A, F1B, F1D, F1E, F2A, F2B, F2D, F2E, F3E, or F9E emissions are used. 

2 New or modified licenses for use of the frequencies will not be granted to utilize transmitters on board aircraft, or to use a bandwidth in excess of 30 kilohertz and maximum deviation exceeding 5 kilohertz. 3For stations licensed or applied for before April 16, 2003, the sum of the bandwidth of emission and tolerance on frequencies 166.25 MHz or 

170.15 MHz shall not exceed 25 kilohertz, and such operation may continue until January 1, 2005. For new stations licensed or applied for on or 

after April 16, 2003, the sum of the bandwidth of emission and tolerance on these frequencies shall not exceed 12.5 kilohertz. For all remote 

pickup broadcast stations, the sum of the bandwidth of emission and tolerance on these frequencies shall not exceed 12.5 kilohertz on or after 

January 1, 2005. 4After [insert effective date of rule], new authorizations with 100 kilohertz bandwidth will not be issued. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 74.463 by revising 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 74.463 Modulation Requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) If frequency modulation or digital 

modulation is employed, the emission 

shall conform to the requirements 

specified in § 74.462. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 74.482 by adding a new 

paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 74.482 Station Identification. 

* * * * * 

(f) Stations that normally employ 

digital signals for the transmission of 

data, text, control codes, or digitized 

voice, may also be identified by digital 

transmission of the call sign. A licensee 

that identifies its call sign in this 

manner must provide the Commission, 

upon request, information sufficient to 

decode the digital transmission and 

ascertain the call sign transmitted. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–04155 Filed 3–3–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 501, 516, 538 and 552 

[GSAR Case 2013–G504; Docket 2014–0020; 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 3090–AJ51 

General Services Administration 

Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); 

Transactional Data Reporting 

AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, 

General Services Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting and 

request for comments on proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The General Services 

Administration (GSA) announces a 

public meeting and request for comment 

on its proposal to amend the General 

Services Administration Acquisition 

Regulation (GSAR) to include clauses 

that would require vendors to report 

transactional data from orders and 

prices paid by ordering activities. This 

includes orders placed against both 

Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract 

vehicles and GSA’s non-FSS contract 

vehicles—Governmentwide Acquisition 

Contracts (GWACs) and 

Governmentwide Indefinite-Delivery, 

Indefinite-Quality (IDIQ) contracts. For 

FSS vehicles, the clause would be 

introduced in phases, beginning with a 

pilot for select products and 

commoditized services. The new clause 

will be paired with changes to the basis 

of award monitoring requirement of the 

existing price reductions clause, 

resulting in a burden reduction for 

participating FSS contractors. This 

rulemaking does not apply to the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

FSS contract holders. 

GSA is interested in conducting a 

dialogue with industry and interested 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS