26756 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 93 /Thursday, May 14, 1998 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

30 CFR Parts 56, 57, 62, 70 and 71

RIN 1219–AB05

Occupational Noise Exposure;

Correction

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health

Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document corrects the

RIN number to the rule for health

standards for occupational noise

exposure published in the Federal

Register on December 31, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia W. Silvey, Director, Office of

Standards, Regulations, and Variances,

MSHA, (703) 235–1910.

Correction

On December 31, 1997, (62 FR 68468)

MSHA published a supplemental

proposed rule on health standards for

occupational noise exposure. This

document corrects an error that appears

on the front page of the notice. The RIN

number 1219–AA53 is corrected to read

1219–AB05.

Dated: May 7, 1998.

Patricia W. Silvey,

Director, Office of Standards, Regulations,

and Variances.

[FR Doc. 98–12757 Filed 5–13–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Ch. I

46 CFR Ch. I

[USCG–1997–3198]

Alternate Convention Tonnage

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments;

extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending

the comment period on its notice

requesting comments on the potential

implementation of alternate convention

tonnage thresholds to October 15, 1998,

to allow additional time for public

comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before October 15, 1998.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to

the Docket Management Facility,

[USCG–1997–3198], U.S. Department of

Transportation, room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington DC

20590–0001, or deliver them to room

PL–401, located on the Plaza Level of

the Nassif Building at the same address

between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329.

The Docket Management Facility

maintains the public docket for this

rulemaking. Comments will become part

of this docket and will be available for

inspection or copying at room PL–401,

located on the Plaza Level of the Nassif

Building at the same address between

10 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. You

may also access this docket on the

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

questions about the notice, call

Lieutenant John G. White, Office of

Standards Evaluation and Development

(G–MSR–2), Coast Guard, telephone

202–267–6885. For information on the

public docket, call Carol Kelley, Coast

Guard Dockets Team Leader, or Paulette

Twine, Chief, Documentary Services

Division, Department of Transportation,

telephone 202–366–9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages you to

participate in this request by submitting

written data, views, or arguments. If you

submit comments, you should include

your name and address, identify this

notice (USCG–1997–3198) and the

specific section or question in this

document to which your comments

apply, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit all comments

and attachments in an unbound format,

no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable

for copying and electronic filing to the

DOT Docket Management Facility at the

address under ADDRESSES. If you want

acknowledgment of receipt of your

comments, you should enclose a

stamped, self-addressed postcard or

envelope.

The Coast Guard will consider all

comments received during the comment

period.

The Coast Guard may schedule a

public meeting depending on input

received in response to this notice. You

may request a public meeting by

submitting a request to the address

under ADDRESSES. The request should

include the reasons why a meeting

would be beneficial. If the Coast Guard

determines that a public meeting should

be held, it will hold the meeting at a

time and place announced by a later

notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

On February 4, 1998, the Coast Guard

published a notice requesting comments

in the Federal Register (63 FR 5767) to

announce it was considering

development of alternate tonnage

thresholds for certain vessels based on

the measurement system established

under the International Convention on

Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969.

Existing tonnage thresholds in domestic

laws and regulations are based on the

U.S. regulatory measurement system.

Establishing alternate convention

tonnages as an option for the

application of domestic regulations may

result in the building of safer, more

efficient vessels and may enable

designers and operators of U.S. vessels

to be more competitive in the

international market. The Coast Guard

asked for comments on the issues and

questions listed in the notice. Due to the

special need for public comment on this

issue and requests for a comment period

extension from the public, the Coast

Guard is extending the comment period

to October 15, 1998.

Dated: May 8, 1998.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Acting Assistant Commandant for Marine

Safety and Environment Protection.

[FR Doc. 98–12847 Filed 5–13–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Parts 201 and 256

[Docket No. RM 98–4]

Cable Compulsory Licenses:

Application of the 3.75% Rate

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of

Congress.

ACTION: Proposed amendments and

policy statement.

SUMMARY: On April 30, 1997, the

Copyright Office published an

amendment to its rules to allow a cable

system to calculate its copyright liability

for carriage of distant signals on a

partially permitted/partially nonpermitted basis where applicable. Under

the new rule, a cable system will apply

the current base rates and the

syndicated exclusivity surcharge, where

applicable, to those subscribers in

communities where the signal would

have been permitted on or before June

24, 1981, and the 3.75% rate to those

subscribers in communities where the

signal would not have been permitted

before that date. Both the base rate fee
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 93 /Thursday, May 14, 1998 / Proposed Rules 26757

1The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

stayed the FCC order pending an appeal of its

decision. On June 16, 1981, the court upheld the

FCC order, see Malrite T.V. of New York, Inc. v.

F.C.C., 652 F.2d 1140 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied,

454 U.S. 1143 (1982), and vacated the stay on June

25, 1981.

2The American Society of Composers, Authors,

and Publishers (ASCAP), and the Motion Picture

Association of America (MPAA) also filed separate

petitions requesting an adjustment of the cable rates

with the CRT in 1981.

3 In a policy statement issued in 1986, the Office

considered whether a cable system could apply

both the base fee and the 3.75% fee toward the

minimum fee imposed by law, see 17 U.S.C.

111(d)(1)(B)(i), and determined that the minimum

fee would not be added to the base fee in those

instances where the 3.75% fee exceeded the

minimum fee. 51 FR 599 (January 7, 1986). In

making this decision, the Office relied upon

statements in the House report accompanying the

Copyright Act of 1976, which indicated that any fee

for a distant signal should be applied against the

minimum. H.R. Rep. No. 94–1476, at 96 (1976).

and the 3.75% fee shall be applied

toward the required minimum fee.

These changes, however, are not

reflected clearly in the current

regulations. Therefore, the Copyright

Office is proposing amendments which

would harmonize the existing

regulations with the new methodology

for calculating the royalty fees for

carriage of partially permitted/partially

non-permitted distant signals.

DATES: Comments on the proposed

technical amendments are due June 15,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David O. Carson, General Counsel, or

Tanya M. Sandros, Attorney Advisor,

Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,

Southwest Station, Washington, D.C.

20024. Telephone (202) 707–8380 or

Telefax (202) 707–8366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

111 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.,

establishes a compulsory license which

authorizes a cable system to make

secondary transmissions of copyrighted

works embodied in broadcast signals

provided that it pays a royalty fee

according to the fee structure set out in

section 111 and meets all other

conditions of the statutory license. The

license also provides for an opportunity

to adjust the statutory royalty rates once

every five years, see 17 U.S.C. 803(a)(2),

or whenever the Federal

Communications Commission (FCC)

amends its rules to allow a cable system

to carry additional signals beyond the

local service area of the primary

transmitter, or its rules governing

syndicated program and sports

exclusivity. See 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(2)(B)–

(C).

The FCC’s distant signal and

syndicated program exclusivity rules

were promulgated in 1972. Cable

Television Report and Order, 36 F.C.C.

2d 143 (1972). In 1976 after Congress

created the cable compulsory license,

the FCC conducted an inquiry to

reexamine the need for these rules and

determined ultimately that there was no

longer a need for maintaining the

distant signal and syndicated program

exclusivity rules. Report and Order in

Docket Nos. 20988 and 21284, 79 FCC2d

663 (1980).

In response to the FCC’s order

repealing its distant signal carriage and

program syndication exclusivity

restrictions on cable retransmissions,

see Report and Order in Docket Nos.

20988 and 21284, 79 F.C.C. 2d 663

(1980), 1 the National Cable Television

Association (NCTA) filed a petition with

the former Copyright Royalty Tribunal

(CRT) to initiate a cable rate adjustment

proceeding in 1981. 2 In that proceeding,

the CRT set two new rate structures,

apart from those specified in the statute,

to compensate the copyright owners for

the loss of the surrogate copyright

protection afforded them under the FCC

rules: a 3.75% rate for the secondary

transmission of formerly non-permitted

distant signals, and a syndicated

exclusivity surcharge for the secondary

transmission of permitted signals that

had been subject to the FCC’s former

syndicated program exclusivity

regulations. 47 FR 52146 (November 19,

1982).

In 1984, the Copyright Office adopted

final regulations to implement the new

rate decision of the CRT, but when

questions concerning the proper

application of the rules concerning the

3.75% rate arose, the Office decided to

take no position on this issue. See 49 FR

26722, 26726 (June 29, 1984). Instead,

the Office allowed each cable system to

decide whether to report a distant signal

as entirely permitted, entirely nonpermitted, or in some instances as

partially permitted and partially nonpermitted, and calculate its copyright

liability accordingly.

This practice comes to an end under

a regulation promulgated last year

which directs cable systems to calculate

the 3.75% rate fee for distant signals on

a ‘‘partially permitted/partially nonpermitted’’ basis. 62 FR 23360 (April 30,

1997). Under the new rule, a cable

system shall calculate its royalty fees for

a partially permitted/partially nonpermitted signal on the basis of gross

receipts from subscribers within the

relevant communities, without regard to

whether the subscriber actually receives

the signal. If the distant signal is

considered permitted with respect to

particular communities under the

Federal Communication Commission’s

former distant carriage rules in effect on

June 24, 1981 (or in the case of those

systems that commenced operation after

June 24, 1981, would have been

considered permitted subject to these

regulations), then the cable system shall

apply the base rate to the signal in those

communities. Alternatively, if the FCC

rules would not have allowed carriage

of the signal with respect to specific

communities, then the cable system

must apply the 3.75% rate to the signal.

62 FR 23360 (April 30, 1997). In an

effort to clarify how to file a statement

of account in those instances where the

cable system carries partially permitted/

partially non-permitted signals, the

Office proposes additional regulatory

language describing how to create

discrete subscriber groups for

calculating the appropriate 3.75% fee,

the base fee, and any applicable

syndicated exclusivity surcharge.

Similarly, for the accounting period

beginning January 1, 1998, we have

begun revision of the statement of

account form to include some specific

changes and special instructions to

guide cable systems in making these

computations.

The Office also proposes amending 37

CFR 256.2 by specifying ‘‘paragraphs

(a)(2) through (4)’’ when the reference is

to the base fee in place of the more

general reference to ‘‘paragraph (a).’’

The Office makes this proposal because

paragraph (a)(1) explains how to

calculate the minimum fee whereas

paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) explain the

methodology for calculating the base

fee. The Office also suggests adding

amendatory language to § 256.2(a)(1)

which makes it clear that both the base

fee and the 3.75% fee shall be applied

toward the cable system’s obligation to

pay a statutory minimum.3 17 U.S.C.

111(d)(1)(B)(i). These suggested changes

do not effect the substance of the

current regulations in any material way.

List of Subjects

37 CFR Part 201

Cable television, Copyright,

Jukeboxes, Literary works, Satellites.

37 CFR Part 256

Cable television, Copyright.

In consideration of the foregoing,

parts 201 and 256 are proposed to be

amended as follows:

PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. The authority citation for part 201

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.

2. Section 201.17(h)(2)(iv) is amended

by adding the phrase ‘‘and the
26758 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 93 /Thursday, May 14, 1998 / Proposed Rules

1Pub. L. No. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996).

syndicated exclusivity surcharge, where

applicable,’’ after the phrase ‘‘the

current base rate’’.

3. Section 201.17(h)(2)(iv) is amended

by adding three sentences to the end of

the paragraph to read as follows:

§ 201.17 Statements of Account covering

compulsory licenses for secondary

transmissions by cable systems.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) * * * The calculations shall be

based upon the gross receipts from

subscribers within the relevant

communities. No cable system shall

make its calculations based solely on

the number of subscribers receiving a

particular signal. For partially-distant

stations, gross receipts shall be the total

gross receipts from subscribers outside

the local service area.’’

* * * * *

PART 256—ADJUSTMENT OF

ROYALTY FEE FOR CABLE

COMPULSORY LICENSE

4. The authority citation for part 256

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 801–803.

5. Section 256.2(a)(1) is amended by

removing the word ‘‘fee’’ and adding the

word ‘‘fees’’ before the phrase ‘‘, if

any,’’.

6. Section 256.2(a)(1) is amended by

adding the phrase ‘‘and (c)’’ after ‘‘(4)’’.

7. Section 256.2(c) is amended by

adding the phrase ‘‘(2) through (4)’’ after

the ‘‘(a)’’ in the phrase which reads ‘‘the

royalty rate shall be in lieu of the

royalty rates specified in paragraphs (a)

and (d) of this section,’’.

Dated: May 7, 1998.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

[FR Doc. 98–12652 Filed 5–13–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–31–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27,

80, 87, 90, 97, and 101

[WT Docket No. 98–20; DA 98–827]

Facilitate the Development and Use of

the Universal Licensing System

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;

extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: The Commission has released

an order which extends the filing

deadlines for comments on its Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 98–25)

regarding the Universal Licensing

System. We also waive the rules that

require the paper filing of comments

and replies. Consequently, the electric

filing of comments and replies will be

permitted. These steps have been taken

to permit more thorough, detailed

comments and replies on the proposed

rulemaking to be filed with the

Commission. The effect will be to

improve the quality of the Commission’s

final determinations in this rulemaking.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

May 22, 1998; reply comments are due

on or before June 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Room 222, 1919 M Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wilbert Nixon or Chris Gacek of the

Policy & Rules Branch, Commercial

Wireless Division, Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418–

7240.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following documents relate to the

aforementioned rulemaking Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, WT Docket No.

98–20, FCC 98–25, 63 FR 16938, April

7, 1998, (ULS NPRM); Electronic Filing

of Documents in Rulemaking

Proceedings, Report and Order, GC

Docket No. 97–113, FCC 98–56, 63 FR

24121, May 1, 1998; Implementation of

Section 255 of the Telecommunications

Act of 1996, Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, WT Docket No. 96–198,

FCC 98–55 (adopted April 2, 1998;

released April 20, 1998), paragraph 185.

The order may be found on the

internet at: <http://www.fcc.gov/

Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/1998/

da980827.txt>.

Federal Communications Commission.

Ramona E. Melson,

Chief, Policy & Rules Branch, Commercial

Wireless Division, Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau.

[FR Doc. 98–12835 Filed 5–13–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter 1

[MM Docket No. 98–35; DA: 98–854]

Broadcast Services; Radio Stations,

Television Stations

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the request of the

National Association of Broadcasters,

the Chief, Mass Media Bureau, acting

under delegated authority, extends the

comment and reply comment deadlines,

on whether any or all of its broadcast

ownership rules are no longer in the

public interest as a result of

competition, for sixty days. The new

deadlines will be July 21, 1998, for

comments and August 21, 1998, for

reply comments.

DATES: Comments are now due by July

21, 1998, and reply comments are due

by August 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roger Holberg, Mass Media Bureau,

Policy and Rules Division, (202) 418–

2134, or Dan Bring, Mass Media Bureau,

Policy and Rules Division, (202) 418–

2170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Order in

MM Docket No. 98–35, DA–854,

adopted and released May 7, 1998. The

complete text of this Order 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., and may

also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

(202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The Order is

also available on the Internet at the

Commission’s web site: http://

www.fcc.gov.:

1. On March 12, 1998, the

Commission, pursuant to Section 202(h)

of the Telecommunications Act of 1996

(‘‘Telecom Act’’),1 adopted a Notice of

Inquiry (‘‘Notice’’), 63 FR 15353, March

31, 1998, in this proceeding soliciting

comment on all of the Commission’s

broadcast ownership rules except for

those already being examined in

pending proceedings. The deadline for

filing comments was set at May 22,

1998, and for reply comments June 22,

1998.

2. On April 20, 1998, the National

Association of Broadcasters (‘‘NAB’’)

filed a ‘‘Motion for Extension of Time of

Comment and Reply Comment

Deadlines’’ seeking a sixty-day

extension of the comment and reply

comment deadlines. NAB states that it

has identified several areas pertinent to

the biennial review in which it plans to

complete research and analysis. It

believes that the results of these studies,

and additional studies currently being