20362 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 79 / Friday, April 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules

been distributed to appropriate federal,

state and local officials and other

interested parties announcing a 30-day

public comment period on the proposed

deletion from the NPL; and

4. EPA has made all relevant

documents available at the information

repositories.

5. EPA will respond to significant

comments, if any, submitted during the

public comment period.

Deletion of the Site from the NPL does

not itself create, alter, or revoke any

individual rights or obligations. The

NPL is designed primarily for

informational purposes to assist Agency

management. EPA will prepare a

Responsiveness Summary, if necessary,

which will address the comments

received during the public comment

period.

A deletion occurs when the Regional

Administrator places a Notice of

Deletion in the Federal Register. Any

deletions from the NPL will be reflected

in the next NPL update. Public notices

and copies of the Responsiveness

Summary, if necessary, will be made

available to local residents by the

Regional office.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

The following site summary provides

the Agency’s rationale for the intention

to delete this Site from the NPL.

The Beulah Landfill Site in Pensacola,

Escambia County, Florida, is located 10

miles northwest of Pensacola. The Site

is located on approximately 102 acres,

80 acres of which comprise the landfill

itself. The Site is separated into two

sections (northern-half and the

southern-half). The northern-half of the

Site operated from 1950 to 1960, and

accepted mostly municipal trash. The

northern-half is now closed. The wastes

are covered with 4 to 6 inches of native

soil.

The southern-half was a borrow pit

for sand prior to 1965. In 1968 a 10 acre

area of the southern-half was excavated

and bermed for the purpose of disposing

of domestic sewage and wastewater

treatment sludges. Initial deposition

rates were approximately 5000 gallons a

day and increased to 20,000 gallons a

day prior to closure in 1984.

Preliminary analytical results of

groundwater, surface water, sludge and

soil samples indicated the presence of

zinc, copper, chlordane,

pentachlorophenol, PCB 1260 and

several polynuclear aromatic

compounds, including anthracene,

fluoranthene, naphthalene and pyrene.

The wastes disposed at the Site

potentially threatened the nearby

surface water bodies, Coffee Creek and

Eleven Mile Creek, the shallow

groundwater system, and the local sand

and gravel aquifer.

Based on those threats the Site was

proposed for listing on the National

Priorities List on June 24, 1988, 53 FR

23988. The listing became final effective

February 21, 1990, 55 FR 6154, with a

Hazardous Ranking Score of 38.15.

On July 7, 1989, the FDEP, formerly

the Florida Department of

Environmental Regulation, issued a

permit for the closure of the landfill,

Permit Number SF17–151349. However,

the permit was not implemented

immediately because of the Site’s listing

on the NPL. The State is now in the

process of closing the landfill.

In September 1991, EPA entered into

an Administrative Order on Consent

(AOC) for the Remedial Investigation/

Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for the Site

with several Potentially Responsible

Parties (PRPs).

The purpose of the RI is to define the

nature and extent of the threat to human

health and the environment.

Information obtained in the RI were also

used to develop the Baseline Risk

Assessment. The purpose of the FS is to

develop and evaluate alternatives for the

remedial action if any is required.

On August 7, 1993, the completed RI

and Baseline Risk Assessment along

with the Proposed Plan for the Site were

made available to the public. On August

17, 1993, a Public Meeting was held at

the George Stone Vocational School to

discuss the RI, Baseline Risk

Assessment and Proposed Plan. At the

meeting, representatives from EPA and

the Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry (ATSDR) were present

to answer questions.

Based on the results of the RI and the

Baseline Risk Assessment for the Site,

EPA determined that no further action

was necessary to ensure the protection

of human health and the environment.

Therefore, on September 16, 1993, EPA

issued its Record of Decision (ROD) for

the Site finding that, with the exception

of groundwater monitoring, its response

at the Site was complete. The PRPs have

collected and analyzed groundwater

samples since 1995, and found all

contaminant levels to be below the

ATSDR comparison values.

Proper closure of the landfill is being

completed by the State of Florida and

does not impact EPA’s intent to delete

the Site from the NPL. A five-year

review will be conducted by EPA in

1998 to confirm that the remedy

remains effective.

EPA, with concurrence of FDEP, has

determined that all appropriate actions

at the Beulah Landfill Site have been

completed, and that no further remedial

action is necessary. Therefore, EPA is

proposing deletion of the Site from the

NPL.

Dated: April 7, 1998.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, USEPA

Region 4.

[FR Doc. 98–10863 Filed 4–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 18

[ET Docket 98–42; FCC 98–53]

Regulations for RF Lighting Devices

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: By this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, the Commission is

proposing to update the regulations for

RF lighting devices. This action is taken

in response to new developments in RF

lighting technology. It is intended to

support the development of new more

efficient RF lighting products for

consumer and commercial applications.

DATES: Comments are due July 8, 1998.

Reply comments are due August 7,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Office of Engineering and Technology,

Anthony Serafini at (202) 418–2456.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking adopted April 1,

1998 and released April 9, 1998. The

full text of this decision is available for

inspection and copying during regular

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, NW,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision also may be purchased

from the Commission’s duplication

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.

Summary of the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

1. By this action, the Commission

proposes to amend part 18 of its rules

to update the regulations for radio

frequency (RF) lighting devices. Recent

developments and advances in RF

lighting technology offer potential

economic and environmental benefits

for consumers and industry. The current

FCC rules, however, may not easily

accommodate these technological

advancements and thus hinder the

further development and

implementation of these new products.

This action seeks to reduce unnecessary
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 79 / Friday, April 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules 20363

regulatory burden and to support the

introduction of new and beneficial

products while ensuring that spectrumbased communications services

continue to be protected from

interference. Accordingly, the

Commission proposes to relax the lineconducted emission limits and to adopt

radiated emission limits above 1 GHz

for RF lighting devices and solicits

comments on these proposals.

2. RF lighting technology has been

typically designed to operate at

relatively low frequencies around 150

kHz. The new products we are

considering are designed to operate at

much higher frequencies and therefore

were not taken into account when the

existing rules were adopted. The new

consumer RF light operates in the 2.2-

2.8 MHz band. This product is more

efficient and longer lasting than existing

incandescent bulbs. We propose to

amend our rules to allow for this new

technology without causing potential

harmful interference to spectrum-based

services. We propose to relax the

consumer line-conducted emission limit

in Section 18.307(c) by 22 dB in the 2.2–

2.8 MHz band to the existing nonconsumer limit of 3000 microvolts.

3. The new commercial use product is

a high-power RF lamp that operates in

the 2400-2500 MHz Industrial,

Scientific, and Medical (ISM) band and

offers benefits similar to the consumer

lighting product. Although this product

is an RF lamp, it uses a magnetron

power source similar to magnetrons

used in microwave ovens operating in

the same band. Therefore, it does not

easily fit under our rules for either RF

lighting or microwave ovens. We

propose to amend the RF lighting rules

to consider the requirements of this new

technology. Specifically, we seek

comment on whether the non-consumer

line-conducted limits in Section

18.307(c) should be relaxed 10 dB for

RF lighting products. We also propose

to adopt out-of-band radiated limits

above 1 GHz.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

4. As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission

has prepared this Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the

expected significant economic impact

on small entities by the policies and

rules proposed in this Notice of

Proposed Rule Making (‘‘Notice’’).

Written public comments are requested

on the IRFA. Comments must be

identified as responses to the IRFA and

must be filed by the deadlines for

comments on the Notice. The

Commission will send a copy of the

Notice, including this IFRA, to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C.

603(a). In addition, the Notice and IRFA

(or summaries thereof) will be

published in the Federal Register.

Need for and Objectives of the Proposed

Rules

5. This rule making proceeding is

initiated to obtain comment regarding

proposals to change the conducted line

emission limits for RF lighting. Recent

developments and advances in RF

lighting technology offer potential

economic and environmental benefits

for consumers and industry. The current

FCC rules, however, do not easily

accommodate these technological

advancements and thus hinder the

further development and

implementation of these promising new

products. This action seeks to relax the

part 18 regulations to accommodate new

and beneficial products while ensuring

that other important communications

services continue to be protected from

interference. This action will potentially

benefit all entities using RF lighting

technologies, including small entities.

Legal Basis

6. The proposed action is authorized

under Sections 4(i), 301, 302, 303(e),

303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301,

302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307.

Description and Estimate of the Number

of Small Entities to Which the Proposed

Rule Will Apply

7. The RFA generally defines a ‘‘small

entity’’ as having the same meaning as

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small

organization,’’ and ‘‘small government

jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term

‘‘small business’’ is the same meaning as

the term ‘‘small business concern’’

under the Small Business Act (‘‘SBA’’),

15 U.S.C. 632, unless the Commission

has developed one or more definitions

that are appropriate to its activities.

Under the SBA, a ‘‘small business

concern’’ is one that (1) is

independently owned and operated; (2)

is not dominant in its field of operation;

and (3) meets any individual criteria

established by the Small Business

Administration (SBA).

8. The Commission has not developed

a definition of small entities applicable

to RF Lighting Devices. Therefore, the

applicable definition of small entity is

the definition under the Small Business

Administration (SBA) rules applicable

to Communications Services, Not

Elsewhere Classified. This definition

provides that a small entity is one with

$11.0 million or less in annual receipts.

According to Census Bureau data, there

are 848 firms that fall under the category

of Communications Services, Not

Elsewhere Classified. Of those,

approximately 775 reported annual

receipts of $11 million or less and

qualify as small entities.

9. This Notice seeks comment to help

the Commission determine the

appropriate regulations necessary to

protect communications services while

facilitating development and use of the

new generation of energy saving RF

lighting devices. We also request

comment on the description and the

number of small entities that may be

significantly impacted by this proposal.

Description of Projected Reporting,

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance

Requirements

10. Under part 18 of the FCC rules,

consumer ISM equipment must be

approved under the FCC certification

process and non-consumer equipment is

subject to verification. No changes are

proposed to the testing and approval

process requirements for RF lighting

product.

Steps Taken to Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and

Significant Alternatives Considered

11. U.S. manufacturers have

developed new RF lighting technologies

that offer potential economic and

environmental benefits to consumers

and industry. General Electric (GE) has

developed and Electrodeless

Fluorescent Lamp (EFL) that operates

between 2.2–2.8 MHz. This a more

efficient, longer lasting consumer lamp

that is an alternative to normal

incandescent light bulbs. EFL lamps

represent a new generation of

technology beyond the existing low

frequency RF lights known as Compact

Fluorescent Lamps (CFL), which are

limited in their applications due to their

non-traditional design using curved

tubing. EFL lamps are nearly identical

in size and shape to incandescent bulbs

and therefore, are expected to have

greater consumer applications and

acceptance over CFL lamps.

12. The existing RF lighting rules

were adopted many years ago for

products operating at relatively low

frequencies and do not easily

accommodate new state-of-the-art RF

lighting technologies. We believe it is

appropriate to examine and modify our

rules to accommodate these new

technologies to the extent possible

while still ensuring that

communications services are protected

from harmful interference.

13. Fusion Lighting, Inc. (Fusion) has

developed an efficient, longer-lasting,
20364 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 79 / Friday, April 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules

1Editorial Note: This document was received at

the Office of the Federal Register on April 17, 1998.

high-power commercial lamp that is

suitable for lighting coverage of large,

commercial areas, such as warehouses,

parking lots and shopping malls.

Fusion’s efforts were supported by the

Department of Energy (DOE), the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

and the National Air and Space

Administration (NASA). Fusion states

that its sulfur based lamp is over four

times more efficient than incandescent

lighting, yet does not have the color

drawbacks of present mercury based

high intensity discharge lamps used in

typical outside lighting and commercial

environments. The lamp produces a

spectra closely matching that of the sun,

but with very little heat or ultraviolet

rays. In testing demonstrations, two

Fusion lamps, shining light from both

ends into a reflective light tube 240 feet

long, were able to replace the light of

240 and 175 watt mercury lamps at the

DOE headquarters. At the National Air

and Space Museum, three Fusion lamps

shining into three separate 90–foot tubes

replaced 94 conventional lights.

14. Fusion states that the cost of

complying with the current lineconducted limits for RF lighting devices

is excessive. The Fusion lamp must use

a line filter to come into compliance

with the line-conducted limits for

commercial RF lighting devices. Fusion

argues that although existing line filters

will permit Fusion’s lamp to pass the

current FCC limits, they are not

designed for the operating temperatures

of the lamp and therefore fail to meet

Underwriter Laboratories (UL) safety

requirements. Additionally, Fusion

solicited data from power supply

manufacturers and notes that a custom

line filter needed to make their product

meet both the FCC and UL requirements

would add approximately 15 percent to

the final cost.

15. At this time, we are proposing no

additional, alternative RF rule

modifications beyond those generally

described by GE and Fusion. We seek

comment on any additional alternatives.

Federal Rules that May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed

Rule

16. None.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 18

Business and industry.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–10948 Filed 4–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 22 and 64

[CC Docket No. 96–115, FCC 98–27]

Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of

Customer Proprietary Network

Information and Other Customer

Information

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission is issuing

this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) seeking comment on three

issues involving carrier duties and

obligations relating to the use of

Customer Proprietary Network

Information (CPNI) and other customer

information established under sections

222(a) and (b) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996. We

are doing this based on various

responses from parties in the

proceeding.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

March 30, 1998 and Reply Comments

are due on or before April 14, 1998.1

Written comments by the public on the

proposed information collections are

due March 30, 1998. Written comments

must be submitted by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) on the

proposed information collections on or

before July 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments and reply

comments should be sent to Office of

the Secretary, Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Room 222, Washington, D.C. 20554,

with a copy to Janice Myles of the

Common Carrier Bureau, 1919 M Street,

N.W., Room 544, Washington, D.C.

20554. Parties should also file one copy

of any documents filed in this docket

with the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 1231 20th St., N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20036. In addition to filing

comments with the Secretary, a copy of

any comments on the information

collections contained herein should be

submitted to Judy Boley, Federal

Communications Commission, Room

234, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to

jboley@fcc.gov, and to Timothy Fain,

OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725—

17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20503 or via the Internet to

fainlt@al.eop.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa

Choi, Attorney, Common Carrier

Bureau, Policy and Program Planning

Division, (202) 418–1580. For additional

information concerning the information

collections contained in this NPRM

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

via the Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(FNPRM) adopted February 19, 1998

and released February 26, 1998 (FCC

98–27). This FNPRM contains proposed

information collections subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA). It has been submitted to the OMB

for review under the PRA. The OMB,

the general public, and other Federal

agencies are invited to comment on the

proposed information collections

contained in this proceeding. The full

text of this Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking is available for inspection

and copying during normal business

hours in the FCC Reference Center, 1919

M St., N.W., Room 239, Washington,

D.C. The complete text also may be

obtained through the World Wide Web,

at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/

Common Carrier/Orders/fcc9827.wp, or

may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th St.,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This NPRM contains a proposed

information collection. The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public and the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) to

comment on the information collections

contained in this NPRM, as required by

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Pub. L. 104–13. Public and agency

comments are due at the same time as

other comments on this NPRM; OMB

notification of action is due 70 days

from date of publication of this NPRM

in the Federal Register. Comments

should address: (a) whether the

proposed collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the Commission,

including whether the information shall

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of

the Commission’s burden estimates; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information collected; and

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on the

respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

OMB Approval Number: 3060–0715.

Title: Implementation of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996:

Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of