Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 1995 / Proposed Rules 22019

appropriate. The Commission would be

required to issue a recommendation

within 60 days.

Request for Comments

The Commission invites interested

parties to submit their views on the

subject matters addressed in the

Service’s petition, and on its substantive

and procedural proposals. In particular,

the Commission invites comments on

the following topics.

1. The Service’s petition

acknowledges the influence of the Joint

Task Force’s recommendations on the

development of its proposals. Does that

report offer other recommendations not

included in the Service’s petition that

warrant consideration?

2. The petition states, without further

elaboration, that existing Commission

and judicial precedent create

impediments to accommodating many

promising ideas for carrying out the

Joint Task Force’s recommendations. Id.

at 4. The Postal Service is requested to

specify to what judicial precedents the

petition refers, and how the proposed

rules accommodate these precedents.

3. Any commenter which considers

one or more of these proposals to violate

current law as judicially interpreted is

requested to explain why that proposal

might be considered unlawful.

Comments addressing whether the

proposals are consistent with the

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.

556, 557, are requested to specify

adequate time periods for various

procedural steps.

4. The petition indicates that the

proposed rules for market tests and

provisional services include certain

presumptions that would apply in

evaluating Postal Service proposals. Id.

at 11 and 13. Is inclusion of these

presumptions an appropriate approach

to Commission review of Service

requests? Should these presumptions be

specified in the rules?

5. The petition indicates that the

Service and Governors believe that

improvements in the ratemaking process

may require direct legislative change or

an explicit clarification that flexibilities

already exist in the current law.

Moreover, the petition states that certain

fundamental changes in the law seem

advisable in any event, particularly in

basic structural matters and in

substantive areas that have been the

most controversial in the past. Petition

at 3–4. The Postal Service is requested

to explain what legislative changes it

believes would be needed to foster

further expedition and flexibility if the

Commission were to adopt the proposed

rules.

6. The petition acknowledges the

Commission’s workload, but

nonetheless urges that a rulemaking

docket be opened to consider the

proposed changes. Petition at 5–6.

Should the Commission consider all

seven of these proposed changes at this

time, or should part or all of the

rulemaking be postponed? If some, but

not all, of the proposals are considered

at this time, which ones should be

reviewed first, and which should be

deferred? Why?

Issued by the Commission on April 24,

1995.

Cyril J. Pittack,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–10944 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

41 CFR Parts 201–23 and 201–24

Amendment of FIRMR Provisions

Relating to GSA’s Role in Screening

Excess and Exchange/Sale Federal

Information Processing (FIP)

Equipment

AGENCY: Information Technology

Service, GSA.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to

amend the Federal Information

Resources Management Regulation

(FIRMR) to allow Federal agencies to

screen and transfer excess and

exchange/sale FIP equipment.

DATES: Comments are due: July 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

GSA/KAR, 18th and F Streets NW.,

Room 3224, Washington, DC 20405,

Attn: R. Stewart Randall, or delivered to

that address between 8 a.m. and 4:30

p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

R. Stewart Randall, GSA, Office of

Information Technology (IT) Policy and

Leadership, Regulations Analysis

Division (KAR), 18th and F Streets NW.,

Room 3224, Washington, DC 20405,

telephone FTS/Commercial (202) 501–

4469 (v) or (202) 501–4469 (tdd).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (1) Part

201–23 is being amended to delegate

authority and responsibility to agencies

regarding the screening and transfer of

excess FIP equipment. Currently, the

FIRMR requires Federal agencies to

request GSA to interagency screen and

transfer excess FIP equipment that is not

outdated and has an original acquisition

cost (OAC) per component of $1 million

or more. It is not necessary for GSA to

continue to operate this program on a

centralized basis. Accordingly, the

requirement for GSA to be directly

involved in interagency screening and

transfer of excess FIP equipment will be

removed from the FIRMR.

(2) Explanation of the changes being

made in this issuance are shown below:

(a) Section 201–23.000 ‘‘Scope of

part’’ is revised by removing paragraphs

(b), (c), and (d) to more succinctly

describe the entire contents of this

revised part.

(b) Section 201–23.001 paragraph

(a)(2) is revised and paragraph (a)(4) is

deleted to remove the references to the

GSA Excess FIP Equipment Program.

Agencies will no longer be required to

submit to GSA information about their

excess FIP equipment with the OAC

above $1 million for GSA to do

interagency screening.

(c) Section 201–23.001 paragraph (b)

is deleted. Section 201–23.001

paragraph (c) is redesignated as

paragraph (b).

(d) Section 201–23.002 paragraph (c)

the sentence ‘‘Agencies may interagency

screen and transfer excess FIP

equipment without GSA approval’’ is

added at the end of the paragraph.

(e) Paragraph (b) of section 201–

23.003 is redesignated as (c) and a new

paragraph (b) is added. In the newly

designated section 201–23.003

paragraph (c)(1), the work ‘‘internal’’

will be removed because it is redundant

in this context. The words ‘‘within the

agency’’ are added at the end of the

paragraph to distinguish these

procedures for interagency screening

from those GSA will require.

(f) Section 201–23.003(c) is

redesignated as paragraph (d) and is

completely revised to remove the

mandatory reporting requirement for

agencies to submit equipment with an

OAC of $1 million or more to GSA for

interagency screening purposes. The

section will now show that agencies

must offer to other Federal agencies

excess FIP equipment with an OAC of

$1 million or more in accordance with

guidelines in FIRMR Bulletin C–2.

(g) Section 201–23.003(d) is

redesignated as paragraph (e) and is

revised to remove words indicating

GSA’s former role in interagency

screening of agencies’ excess FIP

equipment.

(h) Paragraph (h) is added to § 201–

23.003 to show that an agency may

request GSA to review another agency’s

decision to transfer excess FIP

equipment.

(i) Section 201–24.202 referencing the

GSA Excess FIP Program as a mandatory

for consideration program will be

removed because changes to part 201–
22020 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 1995 / Proposed Rules

23 and FIRMR Bulletin C–2 will make

the references no longer valid.

(3) GSA has determined that this rule

is not a significant rule for the purposes

of Executive Order 12866 of September

30, 1993, because it is not likely to

result in any of the impacts noted in

Executive Order 12866, affect the rights

of specified individuals, or raise issues

arising from the policies of the

Administration. GSA has based all

administrative decisions underlying this

rule on adequate information

concerning the need for and

consequences of this rule; has

determined that the potential benefits to

society from this rule outweigh the

potential costs; has maximized the net

benefits; and has chosen the alternative

approach involving the least net cost to

society.

List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 201–23

and 201–24

Archives and records, Computer

technology, Federal information

processing resources activities,

Government procurement, Property

management, Records management, and

Telecommunications.

Accordingly 41 CFR Ch. 201 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 201–23—DISPOSITION

Part 201–23 is revised to read as

follows:

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c) and 751(f).

Sec.

201–23.000 Scope of part.

201–23.001 General.

201–23.002 Policies.

201–23.003 Procedures.

§ 201–23.000 Scope of part.

This part prescribes policies and

procedures to be followed by agencies

for disposing of Government-owned

Federal information processing (FIP)

equipment and software that is no

longer needed for the purpose for which

it was acquired.

§ 201–23.001 General.

(a) Government-owned FIP equipment

that is no longer needed for the purpose

for which it was acquired is either—

(1) Reassigned within the agency;

(2) Declared excess to the agency’s

needs and made available for transfer to

another agency;

(3) Exchanged or sold as part of a

transaction to acquire replacement FIP

equipment; or

(4) Declared surplus and made

available for donation.

(b) FIP software that is no longer

needed for the purpose for which it was

acquired is either—

(1) Reassigned within the agency

consistent with the limitations of any

applicable license; or

(2) Otherwise disposed of consistent

with the limitations of any applicable

license.

§ 201–23.002 Policies.

Agencies shall—

(a) Use FIP equipment of FIP software

that is available for reassignment within

the agency or by transfer from another

agency when such use is the most

advantageous alternative to satisfy the

agency’s requirements.

(b) Make available for reassignment

within the agency FIP equipment that is

not outdated and that is no longer

needed for the purpose for which it was

acquired.

(c) Make available for interagency

screening and transfer to another

agency, excess FIP equipment that is not

outdated and has an original acquisition

cost (OAC) per component of $1 million

or more. Interagency transfer of FIP

equipment that is not outdated with an

OAC per component of less than $1

million, is permitted if the holding

agency learns of a potential user outside

of the screening process. Agencies may

interagency screen and transfer excess

FIP equipment without GSA approval.

(d) Make available for surplus

donation or subsequent sale, excess FIP

equipment not exchanged, sold,

reassigned or transferred.

(e) Consistent with the limitations of

any applicable license—

(1) Make available for reassignment

within the agency FIP software that is

no longer needed for the purpose for

which it was acquired;

(2) Make available for interagency

transfer, excess FIP software not

exchanged or sold, if the holding agency

learns of a potential user outside of the

screening process (GSA does not require

interagency screening of FIP software);

(3) For excess FIP software not

reassigned, transferred, exchanged, or

sold, either:

(i) Return it to the licensor, or

(ii) Destroy it after a duly authorized

agency official determines in writing

that destruction is the most costeffective disposal approach.

§ 201–23.003 Procedures.

(a) Each agency head shall designate

an agency point of contact of managing

the disposition of FIP equipment and

software. Each agency shall submit the

name, address, and phone number of

this individual to the General Services

Administration, Acquisition Reviews

Division (KAA), 18th & F Streets, NW.,

Washington, DC 20405.

(b) GSA will convene meetings with

agency points of contacts periodically to

discuss emerging issues relating to the

disposition of excess FIP resources.

(c) Agencies shall—

(1) Establish procedures for the

reassignment of FIP equipment and

software within the agency; and

(2) Obtain approval from the agency

DSO before reassigning outdated FIP

equipment.

(d) Agencies shall offer excess FIP

equipment that is not outdated and has

an OAC per component of $1 million or

more to other Federal agencies in

accordance with FIRMR Bulletin C–2.

(e) Agencies may conduct exchange/

sale transactions of FIP equipment and

software not transferred to another

agency without GSA approval.

(Exchange/sale transactions for FIP

equipment may be initiated in parallel

with interagency screening, but

screening of exchange/sale transactions

with an OAC per component of $1

million or more shall be completed

prior to concluding an exchange/sale

transaction.) When an agency

determines that FIP equipment will be

replaced by exchanging or selling it, the

agency shall follow the contracting

policies and procedures in part 201–39

and the Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) and the policies and procedures

on exchange/sale contained in 41 CFR

part 101–46. FIP software transactions

must be consistent with the limitations

of any applicable license.

(f) Agencies shall make available for

surplus donation or subsequent sale, in

accordance with 41 CFR parts 101–44

and 101–45, excess FIP equipment not

exchanged, sold, reassigned, or

transferred.

(g) Agencies shall apply the policies

and procedures of this part 201–23 to

FIP equipment used by grantees and

contractors when FIP equipment is—

(1) Acquired by the contractor or

grantee under a contract or grant and the

terms vest title in the Government or the

Government is obligated or has the

option to take over title;

(2) Furnished to the grantee or

contractor by the Government (Transfer

of excess FIP equipment to agency

project grantees shall be conducted in

accordance with 41 CFR 101–43.314.);

or

(3) Operated by the grantee or

contractor as part of a Governmentowned or Government-controlled

facility.

(h) Agencies may request GSA to

review another agency’s decision to

transfer excess FIP equipment. Requests

shall be sent to the General Services

Administration, Acquisition Reviews

Division, (KAA), 18th & F Streets, NW.,

Washington, DC 20405.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 1995 / Proposed Rules 22021

PART 201–24—GSA SERVICES AND

ASSISTANCE

2. The authority citation for part 201–

24 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c) and 751(f).

§ 201–24.202 [Reserved]

3. Section 201–24.202 is removed and

reserved.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

Francis A. McDonough,

Acting Deputy Commissioner for Information

Technology (IT) Policy and Leadership.

[FR Doc. 95–10999 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–25–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95–53, RM–8613]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Eugene,

OR

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by Conway

Broadcasting seeking the allotment of

Channel 265A to Eugene, OR, as the

community’s fifth local FM service.

Channel 265A can be allotted to Eugene

with a site restriction of 7.1 kilometers

(4.4 miles) southeast, at coordinates 44–

00–52 North Latitude; 123–00–50 West

Longitude, to avoid a short-spacing to

the pending application (BPH–

940708IZ) of Station KZUS-FM,

Channel 264C2, Toledo, OR.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 22, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 7, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: Lars Conway, Conway

Broadcasting, 4415 Fremont Avenue,

South, Minneapolis, MN 55409

(Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau,

(202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

95–53, adopted April 19, 1995, and

released May 1, 1995. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW, Washington, D.C. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, International

Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–11013 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95–49, RM–8558]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Llano

and Marble Falls, TX

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by

Maxagrid Broadcasting Corporation,

licensee of Station KLKM(FM), Channel

284C3, Llano, Texas, seeking the

substitution of Channel 285C3 for

Channel 284C3, the reallotment of

Channel 285C3 from Llano to Marble

Falls, Texas, and the modification of

Station’s KLKM(FM)’s license to specify

Marble Falls as the station’s community

of license. Channel 285C3 can be

allotted to Marble Falls in compliance

with the Commission’s minimum

distance separation requirements with a

site restriction of 16.1 kilometers (10.0

miles) southeast to accommodate

Maxagrid’s desired site. The coordinates

for Channel 285C3 at Marble Falls are

30–26–45 and 98–11–45. In accordance

with Section 1.420(i) of the

Commission’s Rules, we will not accept

competing expressions of interest in use

of Channel 285C3 at Marble Falls or

require the petitioner to demonstrate the

availability of an additional equivalent

class channel for use by such parties. In

addition, since Marble Falls is located

within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the

U.S.-Mexican border, concurrence of the

Mexican government has been

requested.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 22, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 7, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: John Joseph McVeigh, Esq.,

Multinational Legal Services, P.C., 11

Dupont Circle, Suite 700, Washington,

D.C. 20036 (Counsel for petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2173.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

95–49, adopted April 19, 1995, and

released May 1, 1995. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC’s

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW, Washington, D.C. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–11014 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F