11410 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules

in these services will be required to

demonstrate that they meet the criteria set

forth in quality as small businesses. See

generally 47 CFR Part 1, Subpart Q

(competitive bidding proceedings). Any

small business applicant wishing to avail

itself of small business provisions will need

to make the general financial disclosures

necessary to establish that the small business

is in fact small.

15. If this occurs, prior to auction each

small business applicant will be required to

submit an FCC Form 175, OMB Clearance

Number 3060–0600. The estimated time for

filling out an FCC Form 175 is 45 minutes.

In addition to filing an FCC Form 175, each

applicant must submit information regarding

the ownership of the applicant, any joint

venture arrangements or bidding consortia

that the applicant has entered into, and

financial information which demonstrates

that a small business wishing to qualify for

installment payments and bidding credits is

a small business. Applicants that do not have

audited financial statements available will be

permitted to certify to the validity of their

financial showings. While many small

businesses have chosen to employ attorneys

prior to filing an application to participate in

an auction, the rules are proposed so that a

small business working with the information

in a bidder information package can file an

application on its own. When an applicant

wins a license, it will be required to submit

an FCC Form 494 (common carrier) or FCC

Form 402 (private radio), which will require

technical information regarding the

applicant’s proposals for providing service.

This application will require information

provided by an engineer who will have

knowledge of the systems design. (Also, the

Commission is currently developing a single,

consolidated MAS form, FCC Form 415,

which will eventually supersede both Form

494 and Form 402.)

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposals

16. None.

G. Significant Alternatives Minimizing the

Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the

Stated Objectives

17. The NPRM solicits comment on a

variety of proposals, some of which are

described below. Any significant alternatives

presented in the comments will be

considered. As noted, we have requested

comment regarding the establishment of a

small business definition for MAS. We also

seek comment generally on the existence of

small entities in MAS and how many total

entities, existing and potential, would be

affected by the proposed rules in the NPRM.

Finally, we request that each commenter

identify whether it is a ‘‘small business’’

under either of the two SBA definitions

described supra—either employing fewer

than 1,500 employees (for radiotelephone

communications companies) or having

annual receipts of $5 million or less (for

telegraph or other message communications

companies).

18. The Commission expects that licensing

subscriber-based MAS bands by geographic

area, as proposed, will assist small

businesses. As described supra, such

licensing makes expansion of operations

easier, and this flexibility assists all licenses,

including small business licensees. We also

believe that the proposed EA geographic area

service area is large enough to support the

services contemplated while being small

enough to be attractive to small business

entities. The NPRM also proposes a purely

private allocation for licenses using MAS

solely for internal uses. In addition, the

proposed flexible approach to the build-out

of MAS systems will assist licensees,

including small business licensees, in

designing and implementing their particular

business plans, while the partitioning and

disaggregation proposals will assist those

small businesses that might otherwise be

unable to acquire a ‘‘full’’ license as currently

configured. Finally, we believe that the

proposed spectrum auction will assist small

entities desiring to obtain MAS licenses. This

approach gets licenses to those most likely to

use them most effectively. By contrast, when

awarding licenses by lotteries it is only

coincidental when the license is awarded to

the entity best suited to using the license.

Using lotteries, therefore, creates uncertainty

for all would-be licensees, including those

that are small business. We seek comment on

all proposals and alternatives described in

the NPRM, and the impact that such

proposals and alternatives might have on

small entities.

[FR Doc. 97–6166 Filed 3–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 300

[I.D. 021197C]

International Code of Conduct for

Responsible Fisheries; Second Draft

Implementation Plan

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the

availability of a second Draft

Implementation Plan (Plan) for the Code

of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

(Code) and invites review and comment.

The purpose and intended effect of this

action is to improve the document and

inform the public of its content.

DATES: Comments should be submitted

on or before April 28, 1997

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Matteo

Milazzo, International Fisheries

Division, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Matteo Milazzo, 301–713–2276.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July

25, 1996, NMFS announced the

availability of an initial Plan for the

Code in the Federal Register (61 FR

38703) and requested comments by

September 23, 1996. At the close of this

period, it became clear that several of

the public comments raised substantive

issues. During the same period, two

other relevant developments took place.

First, the Congress passed numerous

and significant amendments to the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act in

the form of the Sustainable Fisheries

Act (SFA) and, second, NOAA/NMFS

moved into the final and substantive

phase of its long-term program planning

exercise, the NMFS Fisheries Strategic

Plan.

The requirements of the SFA and the

Strategic Plan point in the same

directions as the Code. In effect, NMFS

will implement the Code domestically

as it carries out its Congressionally

mandated responsibilities and the

objectives of the Strategic Plan.

Accordingly, NMFS has redrafted the

Plan, taking into account (1) the

comments received on the first draft; (2)

the guidance provided by Congress in

the Sustainable Fisheries Act; and (3)

the long-term program planning that is

being developed through the NMFS

Fisheries Strategic Plan.

With this notice, NMFS notifies the

public of the second draft’s availability

for comment. It includes the Agency’s

definition of a sustainable fishery, i.e.,

one in which the rate or level of fishing

mortality does not jeopardize the

capacity of the fishery to produce the

maximum sustainable yield on a

continuing basis.

For further background and rationale

for the Plan, please refer to the notice of

availability published on July 25, 1996.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: March 6, 1997.

Nancy Foster,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6193 Filed 3–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

50 CFR Part 630

[I.D.030597B]

Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; Public

Hearings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.