Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Proposed Rules 27545

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 98–13166 Filed 5–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[CS Docket No. 98–61; FCC 98–79]

1998 Biennial Regulatory Review;

Form 325–Annual Report of Cable

Television Systems

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’), the Commission

seeks comment on a proposal to

eliminate or modify the process of

collecting Form 325, ‘‘Annual Report of

Cable Television Systems.’’ This

proceeding is initiated in conjunction

with the Commission’s 1998 biennial

regulatory review. The intended effect

of this proceeding is to reduce the

regulatory burden on the Commission,

as well as cable operators.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

June 30, 1998. Reply comments are due

on or before July 15, 1998. Written

comments by the public on the

proposed information collections are

due June 9, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

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, DC 20554, to

Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236

NEOB, 725—17th Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sunil Daluvoy, Consumer Protection

and Competition Division, Cable

Services Bureau, at (202) 418–1032. For

additional information concerning the

information collection contained in this

NPRM, contact Judy Boley at 202–418–

0214, or via the Internet at

jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the NPRM in CS Docket No.

98–61, FCC 98–79 which was adopted

on April 27, 1998 and released on April

30, 1998. A copy of the complete item

is available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919

M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.

The complete text may be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

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

Washington, D.C. 20036, (202) 857–

3800. The complete Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking also is available on the

Commission’s Internet home page

(http://www.fcc.gov). The requirements

proposed in this Notice have been

analyzed with respect to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (the ‘‘1995 Act’’)

and could potentially impose modified

information collection requirements on

the public. 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 take this

opportunity to comment on the

proposed modifications to the

information collection requirements

contained in this NPRM, as required by

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Public comments are due June 9, 1998.

Written comments must be submitted by

OMB on or before July 20, 1998.

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: 3060–0061.

Title: Annual Report of Cable

Television Systems—Form 325.

Total Estimated Annual Burden to

Respondents: 28,000 hours. The average

burden to respondents is estimated to be

2 hours per Form 325 filing. 14,000

filings × 2 hours = 28,000 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Cost of

Respondents: $14,000. Postage,

stationery and photocopying costs

pertaining to this filing requirement are

estimated to be $1 per form. 14,000 × $1

= $14,000.

Needs and Uses: The Form 325 is a

preprinted form that has been used by

the Commission to annually collect

ownership, community unit, statistical,

technical and services information from

cable television systems on a physical

system basis. Operators of every

operational cable television system

complete the form to verify, correct and/

or furnish the Commission with the

most current information on their

respective cable systems. Here, we have

reported burden estimates to

respondents as they are currently

accounted for in the Commission’s

Information Collection Budget for

Collection Number OMB 3060–0061.

Depending on public comment

generated in this proceeding, the

Commission will either amend the

content of Form 325, eliminate the Form

325 filing requirement or will reduce

the scope or frequency of the filing

requirement.

SUMMARY OF ACTION:

I. Background

1. On April 27, 1998, the Federal

Communications Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) adopted a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking which sought

comment on our proposal to eliminate

or modify Form 325, ‘‘Annual Report of

Cable Television Systems’’, which is

provided for in 47 CFR § 76.403. The

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is

summarized below.

A. Introduction

2. Section 11 of the 1996

Telecommunications Act, instructs the

Commission ‘‘to conduct a biennial

review of regulations that apply to

operations and activities of any provider

of telecommunications service and to

repeal or modify any regulation it

determines to be no longer in the public

interest.’’ Although Section 11 does not

refer to the cable television rules

generally, the Commission has

determined that the first biennial review

presents an opportunity for a thorough

examination of all of the Commission’s

regulations. We believe that

consideration of the continuing need for

the Form 325 information collection

process is consistent with the Section 11

mandate.

B. Discussion

3. Form 325 constitutes the

Commission’s basic annual reporting

requirement for the cable television

industry. The form was developed for

use on a one time basis in 1966 and was

subsequently adopted as an annual

filing requirement in 1971. The form

was intended to provide the

Commission with information that

would be of value in the development

of rules and policies applicable to the

cable television industry. In addition,

information as to both individual

franchise areas and physical system

operations was to be collected for use in

connection with individual waiver or

enforcement proceedings. The current

Form 325 has also been used for two

additional purposes: (1) to obtain

subscribership data from which to

calculate or review cable operator’s
27546 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Proposed Rules

annual federal regulatory fee payments;

and (2) to assist, through the acquisition

of data as to the frequencies used within

systems, in the Commission’s signal

leakage and interference elimination

program.

4. The current version of Form 325 is

divided into four substantive parts. Part

1 collects the operator’s name, address,

and tax identification number of each

franchised community served by the

cable system. Part 2 requests specific

information related to each franchised

community, including the type of area

served, population, subscribers,

potential subscribers, cable plant length,

and initial date of service. Part 3

outlines frequency and signal

distribution information, such as the

type and source of programming, and

general channel information. Part 4

summarizes the cable system’s ancillary

services and users.

5. The Commission’s rules anticipate

that a Form 325 will be mailed annually

to each cable system in the country—at

present, over 11,000 cable systems. In

order to reduce the filing burden and

increase the accuracy of the computer

database to be assembled from the

completed forms, a process was

developed whereby each year

preprinted and completed forms were to

be sent to each operator reflecting the

information in the Commission’s

database. The system operator would

then only be required to correct

information that had changed since the

last filing. Although this process was

intended to ease the burden on system

operators and to be administratively

efficient, it proved to be resource

intensive on the part of the Commission,

because the returned forms, many of

which were deficient in some manner,

had to be manually reviewed for

technical and administrative accuracy

before being entered into the computer

system. As available Commission staff

resources were reduced and priorities

shifted, it became increasingly difficult

to complete the data input process.

Thus, the form has not been mailed out

or data collected since 1994.

6. As a consequence of the above

developments we now prepare to either:

(1) Abolish this data collection process

entirely, or (2) reform the process so that

the data that is deemed important may

be collected in a more efficient, less

resource intensive, manner. In general,

it is vital that the Commission have

accurate and timely information

regarding the cable television industry,

both to assist in the enforcement of

existing requirements and for broader

rulemaking and policy purposes. We

seek comment, however, on whether it

continues to be important for the

Commission to have access to the type

of data reported on the current Form

325 and the extent to which this

information is available from other

sources. For instance, while not subject

to accuracy and specificity requirements

applicable to a governmental reporting

system, information on the basic facts of

cable television system operation is

available from commercial sources such

as S.C. Nielson and Warren Publishing.

We seek comment on whether these

commercial sources may rely for their

information on the availability of the

Commission’s data base. Similarly, with

regard to the signal interference

program, the Commission already uses

Form 320 (Basic Signal Leakage

Performance Report) to gather a cable

system’s operational parameters in the

event interference occurs to over-the-air

services. On the other hand, we noted

in our leased access proceeding, that the

only official source of leased access

information was in the Form 325. Given

the possible availability of alternative

sources of data, we seek comment on

whether we should eliminate the

current Form 325 entirely or revise it to

obtain more focused information.

7. If Form 325 is retained, we seek

comment on any changes that should be

made to clarify and improve the

usefulness of the data collected. For

example, the questions and instructions

with respect to channel capacity and

use data, which is pertinent to a number

of Commission’s rules, including mustcarry, leased access, and channel

occupancy, have not always resulted in

consistent responses. In addition, Form

325 does not require the operator to

submit specific ownership information,

which could be relevant to the

Commission’s horizontal ownership

rules, among others. We seek comment

on how to obtain more useful consistent

or reliable data if the form is retained.

8. In addition, if the Form 325 is

retained, we seek comment on ways to

make the collection process less

burdensome. For example, the data

could be collected at less frequent

intervals, a sampling process could be

developed or an electronic filing system

could be developed to reduce the

resources devoted to the data collection

process. Should, for example, we adopt

a data collection process that applies

only to cable systems that meet certain

geographic, subscriber, channel

capacity, or revenue criteria, or should

such forms apply to a random subset of

cable operators? We note that if data

were collected only from systems with

over 10,000 subscribers, approximately

80 percent of all subscribers would be

covered yet only approximately onetenth of the present filings would be

required.

II. Procedural Matters

A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act

Analysis For the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

9. As required by Section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603,

the Commission is incorporating an

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA) of the expected impact on small

entities of the policies and proposals in

this NPRM. Written public comments

concerning the effect of the proposals in

the NPRM, including the IRFA, on small

businesses are requested. Comments

must be identified as responses to the

IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines

for the submission of comments in this

proceeding. The Secretary shall send a

copy of this NPRM, including the IRFA,

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration in

accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

10. Reasons Why Agency Action is

Being Considered. Section 11 of the

1996 Telecommunications Act requires

the Commission to conduct a biennial

review of regulations that apply to

operations and activities of any provider

of telecommunications service and to

repeal or modify any regulation it

determines to be no longer in the public

interest. Although Section 11 does not

specifically refer to cable operators, the

Commission has determined that the

first biennial review presents an

excellent opportunity for a thorough

examination of all of the Commission’s

regulations.

11. Need for Action and Objectives of

the Proposed Rule Change. The

Commission invites comment on

whether to eliminate or modify the

requirement for cable systems operators

to file the current ‘‘Annual Report of

Cable Television,’’ Form 325, pursuant

to Section 76.403 of the Commission’s

rules (‘‘Section 76.403’’), because the

Commission believes the current Form

325 provides limited value, imposes

unnecessary burdens on the

Commission and cable operators, and

duplicates existing practices.

12. Legal Basis. The authority for the

action proposed for this rulemaking is

contained in Section 4(i)–(j) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended.

13. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities Impacted. The

IRFA directs the Commission to provide

a description of and, where feasible, an

estimate of the number of small entities

that will be affected by the proposed

rules. The IRFA defines the term ‘‘small
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Proposed Rules 27547

entity’’ as having the same meaning as

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small

organization,’’ and ‘‘small business

concern’’ under Section 3 of the Small

Business Act. 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.

14. The proposal to either eliminate or

modify the requirement to file Form 325

applies to all cable system operators.

The Commission has developed, with

SBA’s approval, its own definition of a

small cable system operator for rate

regulation purposes. Under the

Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable

company’’ is one serving fewer than

400,000 subscribers nationwide. Based

on our most recent information, we

estimate that there were 1439 cable

operators that qualified as small cable

companies at the end of 1995. Since

then, some of those companies may

have grown to serve over 400,000

subscribers, and others may have been

involved in transactions that caused

them to be combined with other cable

operators. Consequently, we estimate

that there are fewer than 1439 small

entity cable system operators that may

be affected by the changes we are

considering.

15. The Communications Act also

contains a definition of a small cable

system operator, which is ‘‘a cable

operator that, directly or through an

affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer

than 1% of all subscribers in the United

States and is not affiliated with any

entity or entities whose gross annual

revenues in the aggregate exceed

$250,000,000.’’ The Commission has

determined that there are 61,700,000

subscribers in the United States.

Therefore, we found that an operator

serving fewer than 617,000 subscribers

shall be deemed a small operator, if its

annual revenues, when combined with

the total annual revenues of all of its

affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in

the aggregate. Based on available data,

we find that the number of cable

operators serving 617,000 subscribers or

less totals 1450. Although it seems

certain that some of these cable system

operators are affiliated with entities

whose gross annual revenues exceed

$250,000,000, we are unable at this time

to estimate with greater precision the

number of cable system operators that

would qualify as small cable operators

under the definition in the

Communications Act.

16. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and

other Compliance Requirements: The

Commission is proposing to eliminate

certain recordkeeping or information

collection requirements, and in the

alternative, we are proposing to

substantially reduce such burdens.

17. Significant Alternatives Which

Minimize the Impact on Small Entities

and which are Consistent with Stated

Objectives: The NPRM solicits

comments on alternatives to elimination

of the FCC Form 325. Any significant

alternatives presented in the comments

will be considered.

18. Federal Rules which Overlap,

Duplicate, or Conflict with the

Commission’s Proposal: None.

19. Report to Congress. The

Commission shall send a copy of this

IRFA along with this Notice in a report

to Congress pursuant to the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, codified at 5

U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A). A copy of this

IRFA will also be published in the

Federal Register.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

Analysis

20. The requirements proposed in this

Notice have been analyzed with respect

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(the ‘‘1995 Act’’) and could potentially

impose modified information collection

requirements on the public. The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public to take this

opportunity to comment on the

proposed modifications to the

information collection requirements

contained in this Notice, as required by

the 1995 Act. Public comments are due

21 days from date of publication of this

Notice 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

would 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.

21. Written comments by the public

on the proposed and/or modified

information collections are due June 9,

1998. Written comments must be

submitted by the Office of Management

and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) on the proposed

and/or modified information collections

on or before [insert date 60 days after

date of publication in the Federal

Register.] 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,

DC 20554, or via the Internet to

jboley@fcc.gov and to Timothy Fain,

OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725–

17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC

20503 or via the Internet to

fainlt@al.eop.gov.

C. Ex Parte Rules

22. This proceeding will be treated as

a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding

subject to the ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’

requirements under Section 1.1206(b) of

the rules. 47 CFR § 1.1206(b), as revised.

Ex parte presentations are permissible if

disclosed in accordance with

Commission rules, except during the

Sunshine Agenda period when

presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are

generally prohibited. Persons making

oral ex parte presentations are reminded

that a memorandum summarizing a

presentation must contain a summary of

the substance of the presentation 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. See 47 CFR § 1.1206(b)(2), as

revised. Additional rules pertaining to

oral and written presentations are set

forth in Section 1.1206(b).

D. Filing of Comments and Reply

Comments

23. Pursuant to applicable procedures

set forth in Sections 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 June 30,

1998 and reply comments on or before

July 15, 1998. To file formally in this

proceeding, you must file an original

plus four copies of all comments, reply

comments, and supporting comments. If

you want each Commissioner to receive

a personal copy of your comments and

reply comments, you must file an

original plus nine copies. You should

send comments and reply comments to

Office of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.

Comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center, Room 239, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.

The Cable Services Bureau contact for

this proceeding is Sunil Daluvoy at

(202) 418–1032 or sdaluvoy@fcc.gov.

24. Parties are also asked to submit

comments and reply comments on

diskette, where possible. Such diskette
27548 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Proposed Rules

submissions would be in addition to

and not a substitute for the formal filing

requirements addressed above. Parties

submitting diskettes should submit

them to Sunil Daluvoy of the Cable

Services Bureau, 2033 M Street N.W.,

Room 700I, Washington, D.C. 20554.

Such a submission should be on a 3.5

inch diskette formatted in an IBM

compatible form using MS DOS 5.0 and

WordPerfect 5.1 software. The diskette

should be submitted in ‘‘read only’’

mode. The diskette should be clearly

labelled with the party’s name,

proceeding, type of pleading (comments

or reply comments), and date of

submission. The diskette should be

accompanied by a cover letter.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13168 Filed 5–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018–AE96

Migratory Bird Harvest Information

Program; Participating States for the

1998–99 Season

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) herein proposes to amend the

Migratory Bird Harvest Information

Program (Program) regulations. The

Service plans to require all States except

Hawaii to participate in the Program

annually, beginning with the 1998–99

hunting season. This regulatory action

will continue to require all licensed

hunters who hunt migratory game birds

in participating States to register as

migratory game bird hunters and

provide their name, address, and date of

birth to the State licensing authority.

Hunters will be required to have

evidence of current participation in the

Program on their person while hunting

migratory game birds in participating

States. The quality and extent of

information about harvests of migratory

game birds must be improved in order

to better manage these populations.

Hunters’ names and addresses are

necessary to provide a sample frame for

voluntary hunter surveys to improve

harvest estimates for all migratory game

birds. States will gather migratory bird

hunters’ names and addresses and the

Service will conduct the harvest

surveys.

DATES: The comment period for the

proposed rule will end on July 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to the Chief, Office of Migratory

Bird Management (MBMO), U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, 10815 Loblolly

Pine Drive, Laurel, MD 20708–4028.

The public may inspect comments

during normal business hours in

Building 158, 10815 Loblolly Pine Drive

(Gate 4, Patuxent Wildlife Research

Center), Laurel, MD 20708.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

I. Padding, MBMO, (301)497–5980.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

purpose of this rule is to expand the

Program to include all States except

Hawaii, beginning in the 1998–99

hunting season.

Background

The purpose of this cooperative

Program is to annually obtain a

nationwide sample frame of migratory

bird hunters, from which representative

samples of hunters will be selected and

asked to participate in voluntary harvest

surveys. State wildlife agencies will

provide the sample frame by annually

collecting the name, address, and date

of birth of each licensed migratory bird

hunter in the State. To reduce survey

costs and to identify hunters who hunt

less commonly-hunted species, States

will also request that each migratory

bird hunter answer a series of questions

to provide a brief summary of his or her

migratory bird hunting activity for the

previous year. States are required to ask

each licensed migratory bird hunter

approximately how many ducks (0, 1–

10, or more than 10), geese (0, 1–10, or

more than 10), doves (0, 1–30, or more

than 30), and woodcock (0, 1–30, or

more than 30) he or she bagged the

previous year, and whether he or she

hunted coots, snipe, rails, and/or

gallinules the previous year. States that

have band-tailed pigeon hunting

seasons are also required to ask

migratory bird hunters whether they

intend to hunt band-tailed pigeons

during the current year. States are not

required to ask questions about species

that are not hunted in the State (for

example, Maine does not allow dove

hunting, therefore, the State of Maine is

not required to ask migratory bird

hunters how many doves they bagged

the previous year). States will send this

information to the Service, and the

Service will sample hunters and

conduct national hunter activity and

harvest surveys.

A notice of intent to establish the

Program was published on June 24,

1991 (56 FR 28812). A final rule

establishing the Program and initiating

a 2-year pilot phase in three volunteer

States (California, Missouri, and South

Dakota) was published on March 19,

1993 (58 FR 15093). The pilot phase was

completed following the 1993–94

migratory bird hunting seasons in

California, Missouri, and South Dakota.

A State/Federal technical group was

formed to evaluate Program

requirements, the different approaches

used by the pilot States, and the

Service’s survey procedures during the

pilot phase. Changes incorporated into

the Program as a result of the technical

group’s evaluation were specified in an

October 21, 1994 final rule (59 FR

53334), that initiated the

implementation phase of the Program.

Implementation of the Program began

with the addition of one State in 1994,

three States in 1995 (60 FR 43318),

seven States in 1996 (61 FR 46350), and

five States in 1997 (62 FR 45706). Final

implementation of the Program will be

accomplished with the addition of 27

States (all except Hawaii) in this

proposed rule.

Currently, all licensed hunters who

hunt migratory game birds in

participating States are required to have

a Program validation, indicating that

they have identified themselves as

migratory bird hunters and have

provided the required information to the

State wildlife agency. Hunters must

provide the required information to

each State in which they hunt migratory

birds. Validations are printed on,

written on, or attached to the annual

State hunting license or on a Statespecific supplementary permit. The

State may charge hunters a handling fee

to compensate hunting-license agents

and to cover the State’s administrative

costs. The Service’s survey design calls

for hunting-record forms to be

distributed to hunters selected for the

survey before they forget the details of

their hunts. Because of this design

requirement, States have only a short

time to obtain hunter names and

addresses from license vendors and to

provide those names and addresses to

the Service. Currently, participating

States must send the required

information to the Service within 30

calendar days of issuance of the

migratory bird hunting authorization.

The Service has requested the

cooperation of participating States to

facilitate obtaining harvest estimates for

hunters who are exempted from a

permit requirement and those that are

also exempted from State licensing

requirements. This includes several

categories of hunters such as junior

hunters, senior hunters, landowners,