28410 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules

available through Air Docket A–2000–

18 reference number IV–D–79. The table

consolidates information obtained in

response to the proposal along with

information collected during the

development of the documents outlined

above. EPA is soliciting comment on the

accuracy of the information presented in

the table. In addition to obtaining

comments on the accuracy of the

information provided, the Agency

would like to know if there any other

foam applications that use HCFC

blowing agents but are not listed in the

table.

3. Where Can I Get the Information?

All of the information can be obtained

through the Air Docket (see ADDRESSES

section above for docket contact info).

The reports covering the polystyrene,

spray, sandwich panels and other foam

applications can be obtained through

the docket. Reference numbers are as

follows:

—Synopsis of comments received from

the extruded polystyrene industry:

Air Docket A–2000–18 reference

number IV–D–77

—Overview of challenges facing the

polyurethane spray foam industry

and other systems house based

applications: Air Docket A–2000–18

reference number IV–D–78

(a) Comments from the polyurethane

systems houses (non-spray foam):

Air Docket A–2000–18 reference

number IV–D–78a

(b) Comments from the polyurethane

spray foam systems houses and

contractors: Air Docket A–2000–18

reference number IV–D–78b

4. How Is This Action Related to the July

11, 2000 Proposed Rule?

We are soliciting comment to ensure

that we use the best information

available when making final decisions

regarding the July 11, 2000 proposal.

Because the information provided in

this Federal Register document will be

used by EPA to addresses comments

received on the proposal, the Agency is

providing the public with an

opportunity to comment on the quality

of the available information. This

information will be used to ensure that

issues relating to the technical viability

of alternatives and industry impacts are

fully considered by EPA prior to moving

forward with a rulemaking in the foams

sector.

5. What Is EPA Not Taking Comment

On?

EPA is only accepting comments on

accuracy and completeness of the

information outlined in today’s Federal

Register Notice. EPA is not accepting

comment on the following:

—HCFC foams proposal published on

July 11, 2000 (65 FR 42653)

—HCFC production phaseout

established in EPA’s December 10,

1993 rulemaking (58 FR 65018)

—Allowance System for Controlling

HCFC Production, Import and

Export (draft proposal that may be

published during comment period

on this NODA)

6. What Supporting Documentation Do

I Need To Include in My Comments?

Please provide any published studies

or raw data supporting your position.

Dated: May 4, 2001.

Paul Stolpman,

Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs,

Office of Air and Radiation.

[FR Doc. 01–12896 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Ch. I

[FCC 01–132; CC Docket No. 01–92]

Intercarrier Compensation; Reciprocal

Compensation

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document seeks

comment on the concept of a unified

intercarrier compensation regime,

including alternative approaches such

as ‘‘bill and keep.’’ It addresses

intercarrier compensation-related

problems arising from the introduction

of local competition, and of new

services and technologies, into

telecommunications markets.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

August 21, 2001, and submit reply

comments on or before October 5, 2001.

ADDRESSES: All filings must be sent to

the Commission’s Secretary, Magalie

Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary,

Federal Communications Commission,

Room TW–B204, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20554. Comments may

also be filed using the Commission’s

Electronic Comment Filing System

(ECFS) via the Internet at http://

www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. See

‘‘Comment Filing Procedures,’’ below,

for more detailed instructions on filing

comments and reply comments in this

proceeding.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane

Jackson, Chief, Competitive Pricing

Division, Common Carrier Bureau, (202)

418–1520.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in CC

Docket No. 01–92, FCC 01–132, adopted

April 19, 2001, and released April 27,

2001. The full text of the NPRM is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street,

SW., Room CY–A257, Washington, DC

20554. The full text of the NPRM may

also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

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

D.C. 20036, telephone (202) 857–3800,

facsimile (202) 857–3805. The full text

of the NPRM may also be downloaded

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

Common Carrier/Notices/2001/

fcc01132.doc. Alternative formats

(computer diskette, large print, audio

cassette, and Braille) are available to

persons with disabilities by contacting

Martha Contee at (202) 418–0260, TTY

(202) 418–2555, or at

<mcontee@fcc.gov>.

Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

The NPRM seeks comment on the

appropriate goals for a new intercarrier

compensation regime, including

efficient use of the network, and

efficient investment in, and deployment

of, network infrastructure (including

investment in broadband). The NPRM

seeks comment on the extent to which

any proposed regime achieves

technological and competitive

neutrality, while minimizing regulatory

intervention. It also seeks comment on

the feasibility of a new regime, the

relative trade-offs, and the importance

of having a unified regime altogether.

The NPRM seeks comment on certain

assumptions about intercarrier

compensation. For example, do both

parties benefit from a call, despite the

current regime’s simplifying

requirement for originating callers to

pay for both origination and

termination? What is the extent to

which terminating carriers have

monopoly power over loop access? How

much does that bill and keep avoid

regulatory intervention in the allocation

of common costs, and empower end

users to exercise direct control over

their access arrangements?

The NPRM seeks comment on the

relative efficiencies of bill-and-keep

arrangements. It questions the validity

of the Commission’s previous

determination that bill and keep is only

efficient when there are no trafficsensitive costs of termination, and only

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules 28411

permissible when traffic between two

networks is relatively balanced while

the rates are symmetric. It asks whether

bill and keep would preclude efficient

forms of price discrimination (e.g.,

differential rates for network cost

recovery). Furthermore, the NPRM seeks

comment on how to address the

treatment of transport costs, including

approaches proposed by two

Commission staff working papers that

are discussed in the NPRM. It also seeks

comment on the relative sizes of

transactions costs (i.e., measuring and

billing) for the various alternatives, and

the impact of bill-and-keep on the

opportunities for regulatory arbitrage

that currently exist in, e.g., Internet

telephony, termination of ISP-bound

traffic, and terminating access charges

for interstate voice traffic.

The NPRM also seeks comment on the

potential disadvantages of a bill-andkeep arrangement, including: (a)

Incentives for carriers to locate central

offices inefficiently; (b) how to

determine the incremental cost of

interconnection when networks are lessthan-fully provisioned; (c) the potential

for unwanted calls to increase; and (d)

the potential for ISPs to begin to charge

traffic-sensitive rates or higher flat rates

to end users.

With regard to specific services, the

NPRM seeks comment on whether the

Commission should adopt bill and keep

for ISP-bound traffic. The NPRM asks

about local exchange carrier (LEC) cost

recovery, and any effects on unbundled

network element (UNE) pricing, if the

Commission should move to a bill-andkeep regime for all ISP-bound traffic.

The NPRM also seeks comment on the

relative benefits of bill and keep for all

traffic subject to section 251(b)(5) of the

Communications Act of 1934 (‘‘the

Communications Act’’), versus the

current per-minute reciprocal

compensation rates imposed by most

states. The NPRM specifically addresses

issues concerning points of

interconnection, three-carrier calls, and

the question of whether bill-and-keep

rate structures satisfy the requirements

of sections 251(b)(5) and 252(d)(2) of the

Communications Act.

In addition, the NPRM seeks comment

on the Commission’s legal authority

over interconnection between LECs and

commercial mobile radio services

(CMRS) under section 332 of the

Communications Act, and on the

adoption of a new LEC-CMRS

intercarrier compensation regime. With

regard to interstate access charges, the

NPRM seeks comment on the eventual

application of a bill-and-keep regime,

and asks whether it is appropriate to

phase in a new access charge regime in

stages.

Apart from moving to a bill-and-keep

regime, the NPRM seeks comment on

whether the existing calling-party’snetwork-pays regime could be reformed

to address the problems that motivate

this rulemaking. As such, it seeks

comment on rate level issues (e.g.,

identifying ‘‘additional costs’’ under

section 252(d)(2) of the

Communications Act, and applying

presumptive ILEC cost proxies), rate

structure issues, single point of

interconnection issues, virtual central

office codes, and administrative

feasibility.

The NPRM also seeks comment on the

impacts of moving to a new regime on

end user rates, and universal service.

Furthermore, it seeks comment on legal

issues concerning the authority for a

new regime, together with the effect of

proposals for a unified regime on the

division of jurisdictional responsibility

between the Commission and the states.

Finally, the NPRM seeks comment on

the impact of a new regime on

interconnection agreements between

international carriers, and on

interconnection agreements between

Internet backbones. It asks about the

potential impact on small entities that

may result from the adoption of a new

regime. It concludes by seeking

comment on any further possible

approaches to intercarrier compensation

that are not addressed in the NPRM.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Final

Analysis

As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission

has prepared this present Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)

of the possible significant economic

impact on small entities by the policies

and rules proposed in this NPRM.

Written public comments are requested

on this IRFA. Comments must be

identified as responses to the IRFA and

must be filed by the deadlines for

comments on the NPRM provided

above. The Commission will send a

copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA,

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration (SBA).

See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). In addition, the

NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof)

will be published in the Federal

Register. See id.

I. Need for, and Objectives of, the

Proposed Rules

The existing intercarrier

compensation regime applies different

sets of rules to different types of carriers

and to different types of traffic.

Basically, this patchwork of rules can be

broken down into: (1) reciprocal

compensation rules, which apply to the

exchange of local traffic; and (2) access

rules that apply to traffic exchanged

between local carriers and long-distance

carriers. Both sets of rules are ‘‘callingparty’s-network-pays’’ (CPNP)

arrangements (i.e., they require the

calling party’s network to pay the called

party’s network to terminate a call).

Both sets of rules are also subject to

numerous exceptions, such as the

enhanced service provider (ESP)

exemption from access charges.

This NPRM is motivated by numerous

problems that have appeared recently

concerning the existing rules governing

intercarrier compensation. A primary

concern is the opportunity, under the

current regime, for profit-seeking

behavior to take advantage of cost or

revenue disparities that are due solely to

regulation. For example, competitive

local exchange carriers (CLECs) often

target Internet service providers (ISPs)

as customers in order to become netrecipients of traffic, and thus profit from

reciprocal compensation revenues.

Similarly, Internet Protocol (IP)

telephony threatens to erode access

revenues for LECs because it is exempt

from the access charges that traditional

long-distance carriers must pay.

Another major concern is that local

carriers possess monopoly power over

terminating access. As a result, CLECs

often impose access charges that far

exceed the regulated access charges of

incumbent LECs. Finally, the current

regime can generate inefficient trafficsensitive end-user rates, and can also

create incentives for entities to claim to

be networks in order to qualify for

interconnection, rather than to simply

subscribe as a customer.

II. Legal Basis

The legal basis for any action that may

be taken pursuant to the NPRM is

contained in sections 4, 201–202, 303

and 403 of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 201–

202, 303 and 403, and sections 1.1,

1.411 and 1.412 of the Commission’s

rules, 47 CFR 1.1, 1.411 and 1.412.

III. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which

Rules Will Apply

The RFA directs agencies to provide

a description of, and, where feasible, an

estimate of the number of small entities

that may be affected by the proposed

rules, if adopted. 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). The

RFA defines the term ‘‘small 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. 5

28412 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules

U.S.C. 601(3). 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. 5 U.S.C. 632.

A small organization is generally ‘‘any

not-for-profit enterprise which is

independently owned and operated and

is not dominant in its field.’’ 5 U.S.C.

601(4). Nationwide, as of 1992, there

were approximately 275,801 small

organizations. ‘‘Small governmental

jurisdiction’’ generally means

‘‘governments of cities, counties, towns,

townships, villages, school districts, or

special districts, with a population of

less than 50,000.’’ As of 1992, there

were approximately 85,006 such

jurisdictions in the United States. This

number includes 38,978 counties, cities,

and towns; of these, 37,566, or 96

percent, have populations of fewer than

50,000. The Census Bureau estimates

that this ratio is approximately accurate

for all governmental entities. Thus, of

the 85,006 governmental entities, we

estimate that 81,600 (96 percent) are

small entities. According to SBA

reporting data, there were 4.44 million

small business firms nationwide in

1992. Below, we further describe and

estimate the number of small entity

licensees and regulatees that may be

affected by rules adopted pursuant to

this NPRM.

The most reliable source of

information regarding the total numbers

of certain common carrier and related

providers nationwide, as well as the

number of commercial wireless entities,

appears to be the data that the

Commission publishes in its Trends in

Telephone Service report. In a recent

news release, the Commission indicated

that there are 4,822 interstate carriers.

These carriers include, inter alia, local

exchange carriers, wireline carriers and

service providers, interexchange

carriers, competitive access providers,

operator service providers, pay

telephone operators, providers of

telephone service, providers of

telephone exchange service, and

resellers.

The SBA has defined establishments

engaged in providing ‘‘Radiotelephone

Communications’’ and ‘‘Telephone

Communications, Except

Radiotelephone’’ to be small businesses

when they have no more than 1,500

employees. Below, we discuss the total

estimated number of telephone

companies falling within the two

categories, and the number of small

businesses in each. We then attempt to

further refine those estimates to

correspond with the categories of

telephone companies that are commonly

used under our rules.

We have included small incumbent

LECs (small ILECs) in this present RFA

analysis. As noted above, a ‘‘small

business’’ under the RFA is one that,

inter alia, meets the pertinent small

business size standard (e.g., a telephone

communications business having 1,500

or fewer employees), and ‘‘is not

dominant in its field of operation.’’ The

SBA’s Office of Advocacy contends that,

for RFA purposes, small ILECs are not

dominant in their field of operation

because any such dominance is not

‘‘national’’ in scope. We have therefore

included small incumbent LECs in this

RFA analysis, although we emphasize

that this RFA action has no effect on

Commission analyses and

determinations in other, non-RFA

contexts.

Total Number of Telephone

Companies Affected. The U.S. Bureau of

the Census (‘‘Census Bureau’’) reports

that, at the end of 1992, there were

3,497 firms engaged in providing

telephone services, as defined therein,

for at least one year. This number

contains a variety of different categories

of carriers, including local exchange

carriers, interexchange carriers,

competitive access providers, cellular

carriers, mobile service carriers,

operator service providers, pay

telephone operators, covered

specialized mobile radio providers, and

resellers. It seems certain that some of

these 3,497 telephone service firms may

not qualify as small entities or small

ILECs because they are not

‘‘independently owned and operated.’’

For example, a PCS provider that is

affiliated with an interexchange carrier

having more than 1,500 employees

would not meet the definition of a small

business. It is reasonable to conclude

that fewer than 3,497 telephone service

firms are small entity telephone service

firms or small ILECs that may be

affected by the new rules.

Wireline Carriers and Service

Providers. The SBA has developed a

definition of small entities for telephone

communications companies except

radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. The Census Bureau reports

that there were 2,321 such telephone

companies in operation for at least one

year at the end of 1992. According to the

SBA’s definition, a small business

telephone company other than a

radiotelephone company is one

employing no more than 1,500 persons.

All but 26 of the 2,321 nonradiotelephone companies listed by the

Census Bureau were reported to have

fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, even

if all 26 of those companies had more

than 1,500 employees, there would still

be 2,295 non-radiotelephone companies

that might qualify as small entities or

small ILECs. We do not have data

specifying the number of these carriers

that are not independently owned and

operated, and thus are unable at this

time to estimate with greater precision

the number of wireline carriers and

service providers that would qualify as

small business concerns under the

SBA’s definition. Consequently, we

estimate 2,295 or fewer small telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone companies are small

entities or small ILECs that may be

affected by rules adopted pursuant to

this NPRM. 

Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the

Commission nor the SBA has developed

a definition for small providers of local

exchange services (LECs). The closest

applicable definition under the SBA

rules is for telephone communications

companies other than radiotelephone

(i.e., wireless) companies. According to

the most recent Telecommunications

Industry Revenue data, 1,335 incumbent

carriers reported that they were engaged

in the provision of local exchange

services. We do not have data specifying

the number of these carriers that are

either dominant in their field of

operations, are not independently

owned and operated, or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of LECs that

would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that 1,335 or

fewer providers of local exchange

service are small entities or small ILECs

that may be affected by the new rules.

Interexchange Carriers. Neither the

Commission nor the SBA has developed

a definition of small entities specifically

applicable to providers of interexchange

services (IXCs). The closest applicable

definition under the SBA rules is for

telephone communications companies

other than radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. According to the most

recent Trends in Telephone Service

data, 204 carriers reported that they

were engaged in the provision of

interexchange services. We do not have

data specifying the number of these

carriers that are not independently

owned and operated or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of IXCs that

would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

204 or fewer small-entity IXCs that may

be affected by rules adopted pursuant to

this NPRM.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules 28413

Competitive Access Providers. Neither

the Commission nor the SBA has

developed a definition of small entities

specifically applicable to competitive

access services providers (CAPs). The

closest applicable definition under the

SBA rules is for telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. According to the most

recent Trends in Telephone Service

data, 349 CAP/CLEC carriers and 60

other LECs reported that they were

engaged in the provision of competitive

local exchange services. We do not have

data specifying the number of these

carriers that are not independently

owned and operated, or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of CAPs that

would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

349 or fewer small-entity CAPs and 60

or fewer other LECs that may be affected

by rules adopted pursuant to this

NPRM.

Operator Service Providers. Neither

the Commission nor the SBA has

developed a definition of small entities

specifically applicable to providers of

operator services. The closest applicable

definition under the SBA rules is for

telephone communications companies

other than radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. According to the most

recent Trends in Telephone Service

data, 21 carriers reported that they were

engaged in the provision of operator

services. We do not have data specifying

the number of these carriers that are not

independently owned and operated or

have more than 1,500 employees, and

thus are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

operator service providers that would

qualify as small business concerns

under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

21 or fewer small-entity operator service

providers that may be affected by rules

adopted pursuant to this NPRM.

Pay Telephone Operators. Neither the

Commission nor the SBA has developed

a definition of small entities specifically

applicable to pay telephone operators.

The closest applicable definition under

SBA rules is for telephone

communications companies other than

radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. According to the most

recent Trends in Telephone Service

data, 758 carriers reported that they

were engaged in the provision of pay

telephone services. We do not have data

specifying the number of these carriers

that are not independently owned and

operated or have more than 1,500

employees, and thus are unable at this

time to estimate with greater precision

the number of pay telephone operators

that would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

758 or fewer small-entity pay telephone

operators that may be affected by rules

adopted pursuant to this NPRM.

Resellers (including debit card

providers). Neither the Commission nor

the SBA has developed a definition of

small entities specifically applicable to

resellers. The closest applicable SBA

definition for a reseller is a telephone

communications company other than

radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies. According to the most

recent Trends in Telephone Service

data, 454 toll and 87 local entities

reported that they were engaged in the

resale of telephone service. We do not

have data specifying the number of

these carriers that are not independently

owned and operated or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of resellers that

would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

454 or fewer small-toll-entity resellers

and 87 or fewer small-local-entity

resellers that may be affected by rules

adopted pursuant to this NPRM.

Toll-Free 800 and 800-Like Service

Subscribers. Neither the Commission

nor the SBA has developed a definition

of small entities specifically applicable

to 800 and 800-like service (‘‘toll free’’)

subscribers. The most reliable source of

information regarding the number of

these service subscribers appears to be

data the Commission collects on the

800, 888, and 877 numbers in use.

According to our most recent data, at

the end of January 1999, the number of

800 numbers assigned was 7,692,955;

the number of 888 numbers that had

been assigned was 7,706,393; and the

number of 877 numbers assigned was

1,946,538. We do not have data

specifying the number of these

subscribers that are not independently

owned and operated or have more than

1,500 employees, and thus are unable at

this time to estimate with greater

precision the number of toll free

subscribers that would qualify as small

business concerns under the SBA’s

definition. Consequently, we estimate

that there are 7,692,955 or fewer smallentity 800 subscribers, 7,706,393 or

fewer small-entity 888 subscribers, and

1,946,538 or fewer small-entity 877

subscribers that may be affected by rules

adopted pursuant to this NPRM.

Cellular Licensees. Neither the

Commission nor the SBA has developed

a definition of small entities applicable

to cellular licensees. Therefore, the

applicable definition of small entity is

the definition under the SBA rules

applicable to radiotelephone (i.e.,

wireless) companies. This definition

provides that a small entity is a

radiotelephone company employing no

more than 1,500 persons. According to

the Bureau of the Census, only 12

radiotelephone firms out of a total of

1,178 such firms that operated during

1992 had 1,000 or more employees.

Therefore, even if all 12 of these firms

were cellular telephone companies,

nearly all cellular carriers were small

businesses under the SBA’s definition.

In addition, we note that there are 1,758

cellular licenses; however, we do not

know the number of cellular licensees,

since a cellular licensee may own

several licenses. The most reliable

source of information regarding the

number of cellular service providers

nationwide appears to be data the

Commission publishes annually in its

Telecommunications Industry Revenue

report, regarding the

Telecommunications Relay Service

(TRS). The report places cellular

licensees and Personal Communications

Service (PCS) licensees in one group.

According to recent data, 808 carriers

reported that they were engaged in the

provision of either cellular or PCS

services. We do not have data specifying

the number of these carriers that are not

independently owned and operated or

have more than 1,500 employees, and

thus are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

cellular service carriers that would

qualify as small business concerns

under the SBA’s definition.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

no more than 808 small cellular service

carriers.

220 MHz Radio Service-Phase I

Licensees. The 220 MHz service has

both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase

I licensing was conducted by lotteries in

1992 and 1993. There are approximately

1,515 such non-nationwide licensees

and 4 nationwide licensees currently

authorized to operate in the 220 MHz

band. The Commission has not

developed a definition of small entities

specifically applicable to such

incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees.

To estimate the number of such

licensees that are small businesses, we

apply the definition under the SBA

rules applicable to radiotelephone

communications companies. This

definition provides that a small entity is

a radiotelephone company employing

no more than 1,500 persons. According

to a 1995 estimate by the Bureau of the

28414 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules

Census, only 12 radiotelephone firms

out of a total of 1,178 such firms that

operated during 1992 had 1,000 or more

employees. Therefore, assuming that

this general ratio has not changed

significantly in recent years in the

context of Phase I 220 MHz licensees,

we estimate that nearly all such

licensees are small businesses under the

SBA’s definition.

220 MHz Radio Service-Phase II

Licensees. The Phase II 220 MHz service

is a new service, and is subject to

spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz

Third Report and Order, 62 FR 15978,

we adopted criteria for defining small

businesses and very small businesses for

purposes of determining their eligibility

for special provisions such as bidding

credits and installment payments. We

have defined a small business as an

entity that, together with its affiliates

and controlling principals, has average

gross revenues not exceeding $15

million for the preceding three years.

Additionally, a very small business is

defined as an entity that, together with

its affiliates and controlling principals,

has average gross revenues that are not

more than $3 million for the preceding

three years. The SBA has approved

these definitions. An auction of Phase II

licenses commenced on September 15,

1998, and closed on October 22, 1998.

Nine hundred and eight (908) licenses

were auctioned in three different-sized

geographic areas: 3 nationwide licenses,

30 Regional Economic Area Group

(REAG) licenses, and 875 Economic

Area (EA) licenses. Of the 908 licenses

auctioned, 693 were sold. Companies

claiming small business status won: 1 of

the Nationwide licenses, 67% of the

Regional licenses, 47% of the REAG

licenses and 54% of the EA licenses. As

of January 22, 1999, the Commission

announced that it was prepared to grant

654 of the Phase II licenses won at

auction. A second 220 MHz Radio

Service auction began on June 8, 1999

and closed on June 30, 1999. This

auction offered 225 licenses in 87 EAs

and 4 REAGs. (A total of 9 REAG

licenses and 216 EA licenses. No

nationwide licenses were available in

this auction.) Of the 215 EA licenses

won, 153 EA licenses (71%) were won

by bidders claiming small business

status. Of the 7 REAG licenses won, 5

REAG licenses (71%) were won by

bidders claiming small business status.

Private and Common Carrier Paging.

The Commission has adopted a two-tier

definition of small businesses in the

context of auctioning licenses in the

Common Carrier Paging and exclusive

Private Carrier Paging services. A small

business will be defined as either: (1)

An entity that, together with its affiliates

and controlling principals, has average

gross revenues for the three preceding

years of not more than $3 million; or (2)

an entity that, together with affiliates

and controlling principals, has average

gross revenues for the three preceding

calendar years of not more than $15

million. Because the SBA has not yet

approved this definition for paging

services, we will utilize the SBA’s

definition applicable to radiotelephone

companies, i.e., an entity employing no

more than 1,500 persons. At present,

there are approximately 24,000 Private

Paging licenses and 74,000 Common

Carrier Paging licenses. According to

recent data, 172 carriers reported that

they were engaged in the provision of

either paging or ‘‘other mobile’’ services,

which are placed together in the data.

We do not have data specifying the

number of these carriers that are not

independently owned and operated or

have more than 1,500 employees, and

thus are unable at this time to estimate

with greater precision the number of

paging carriers that would qualify as

small business concerns under the

SBA’s definition. Consequently, we

estimate that there are no more than 172

small paging carriers. We estimate that

the majority of private and common

carrier paging providers would qualify

as small entities under the SBA

definition.

Mobile Service Carriers. Neither the

Commission nor the SBA has developed

a definition of small entities specifically

applicable to mobile service carriers,

such as paging companies. As noted

above in the section concerning paging

service carriers, the closest applicable

definition under the SBA rules is that

for radiotelephone (i.e., wireless)

companies, and recent data show that

172 carriers reported that they were

engaged in the provision of either

paging or ‘‘other mobile’’ services.

Consequently, we estimate that there are

no more than 172 small mobile service

carriers.

Broadband Personal Communications

Service (PCS). The broadband PCS

spectrum is divided into six frequency

blocks designated A through F, and the

Commission has held auctions for each

block. The Commission defined ‘‘small

entity’’ for blocks C and F as an entity

that has average gross revenues of less

than $40 million in the three previous

calendar years. For block F, an

additional classification for ‘‘very small

business’’ was added and is defined as

an entity that, together with affiliates,

has average gross revenues of not more

than $15 million for the preceding three

calendar years. These regulations

defining ‘‘small entity’’ in the context of

broadband PCS auctions have been

approved by the SBA. No small

businesses within the SBA-approved

definition bid successfully for licenses

in blocks A and B. There were 90

winning bidders that qualified as small

entities in the C block auctions. A total

of 93 small and very small business

bidders won approximately 40% of the

1,479 licenses for blocks D, E and F. On

March 23, 1999, the Commission held

another auction (Auction No. 22) of C,

D, E and F block licenses for PCS

spectrum returned to the Commission

by previous license holders. In that

auction, 48 bidders claiming small

business, very small business or

entrepreneurial status won 272 of the

341 licenses (80%) offered. Based on

this information, we conclude that the

number of small broadband PCS

licensees includes the 90 winning C

block bidders, the 93 qualifying bidders

in the D, E and F blocks, and the 48

winning bidders from Auction No. 22,

for a total of 231 small-entity PCS

providers as defined by the SBA and the

Commission’s auction rules.

Narrowband PCS. The Commission

has auctioned nationwide and regional

licenses for narrowband PCS. There are

11 nationwide and 30 regional licensees

for narrowband PCS. The Commission

does not have sufficient information to

determine whether any of these

licensees are small businesses within

the SBA-approved definition for

radiotelephone companies. At present,

there have been no auctions held for the

major trading area (MTA) and basic

trading area (BTA) narrowband PCS

licenses. The Commission anticipates a

total of 561 MTA licenses and 2,958

BTA licenses will be awarded by

auction. Such auctions, however, have

not yet been scheduled. Given that

nearly all radiotelephone companies

have no more than 1,500 employees,

and no reliable estimate of the number

of prospective MTA and BTA

narrowband licensees can be made, we

assume, for our purposes here, that all

of the licenses will be awarded to small

entities, as that term is defined by the

SBA.

Rural Radiotelephone Service. The

Commission has not adopted a

definition of small entity specific to the

Rural Radiotelephone Service. A

significant subset of the Rural

Radiotelephone Service is the Basic

Exchange Telephone Radio Systems

(BETRS). We will use the SBA’s

definition applicable to radiotelephone

companies, i.e., an entity employing no

more than 1,500 persons. There are

approximately 1,000 licensees in the

Rural Radiotelephone Service, and we

estimate that almost all of them qualify

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules 28415

as small entities under the SBA’s

definition.

Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.

The Commission has not adopted a

definition of small entity specific to the

Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.

Accordingly, we will use the SBA’s

definition applicable to radiotelephone

companies, i.e., an entity employing no

more than 1,500 persons. There are

approximately 100 licensees in the AirGround Radiotelephone Service, and we

estimate that almost all of them qualify

as small under the SBA definition.

Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR). The

Commission awards bidding credits in

auctions for geographic area 800 MHz

and 900 MHz SMR licenses to two tiers

of firms: (1) ‘‘small entities,’’ those with

revenues of no more than $15 million in

each of the three previous calendar

years; and (2) ‘‘very small entities,’’

those with revenues of no more than $3

million in each of the three previous

calendar years. The regulations defining

‘‘small entity’’ and ‘‘very small entity’’

in the context of 800 MHz SMR (upper

10 MHz and lower 230 channels) and

900 MHz SMR have been approved by

the SBA. The Commission does not

know how many firms provide 800 MHz

or 900 MHz geographic area SMR

service pursuant to extended

implementation authorizations, nor how

many of these providers have annual

revenues of no more than $15 million.

One firm has over $15 million in

revenues. We assume, for our purposes

here, that all of the remaining existing

extended implementation

authorizations are held by small

entities, as that term is defined by the

SBA. The Commission has held

auctions for geographic area licenses in

the 800 MHz (upper 10 MHz) and 900

MHz SMR bands. There were 60

winning bidders that qualified as small

and very small entities in the 900 MHz

auction. Of the 1,020 licenses won in

the 900 MHz auction, 263 licenses were

won by bidders qualifying as small and

very small entities. In the 800 MHz SMR

auction, 38 of the 524 licenses won were

won by small and very small entities.

Marine Coast Service. Between

December 3, 1998 and December 14,

1998, the Commission held an auction

of 42 VHF Public Coast licenses in the

157.1875–157.4500 MHz (ship transmit)

and 161.775–162.0125 MHz (coast

transmit) bands. For purposes of this

auction, and for future public coast

auctions, the Commission defines a

‘‘small’’ business as an entity that,

together with controlling interests and

affiliates, has average gross revenues for

the preceding three years not to exceed

$15 million dollars. A ‘‘very small’’

business is one that, together with

controlling interests and affiliates, has

average gross revenues for the preceding

three years not to exceed $3 million

dollars. There are approximately 10,672

licensees in the Marine Coast Service,

and the Commission estimates that

almost all of them qualify as ‘‘small’’

businesses under the Commission’s

definition, which has been approved by

the SBA.

Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave

services include common carrier,

private-operational fixed, and broadcast

auxiliary radio services. At present,

there are approximately 22,015 common

carrier fixed licensees and 61,670

private operational-fixed licensees and

broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in

the microwave services. The

Commission has not yet defined a small

business with respect to microwave

services. For our purposes here, we will

utilize the SBA’s definition applicable

to radiotelephone companies—i.e., an

entity with no more than 1,500 persons.

Under this definition, we estimate that

all of the Fixed Microwave licensees

(excluding broadcast auxiliary

licensees) would qualify as small

entities.

Local Multipoint Distribution Service.

The Commission held two auctions for

licenses in the Local Multipoint

Distribution Services (LMDS) (Auction

No. 17 and Auction No. 23). For both of

these auctions, the Commission defined

a small business as an entity, together

with its affiliates and controlling

principals, having average gross

revenues for the three preceding years of

not more than $40 million. A very small

business was defined as an entity,

together with affiliates and controlling

principals, having average gross

revenues for the three preceding years of

not more than $15 million. Of the 144

winning bidders in Auction Nos. 17 and

23, 125 bidders (87%) were small or

very small businesses.

24 GHz—Incumbent 24 GHz

Licensees. The rules that we may later

adopt could affect incumbent licensees

who were relocated to the 24 GHz band

from the 18 GHz band, and applicants

who wish to provide services in the 24

GHz band. The Commission has not

developed a definition of small entities

applicable to licensees in the 24 GHz

band. Therefore, the applicable

definition of small entity is the

definition under the SBA rules for the

radiotelephone industry, providing that

a small entity is a radiotelephone

company employing fewer than 1,500

persons. The 1992 Census of

Transportation, Communications and

Utilities, conducted by the Bureau of the

Census, which is the most recent

information available, shows that only

12 radiotelephone firms out of a total of

1,178 such firms that operated during

1992 had 1,000 or more employees. This

information notwithstanding, we

believe that there are only two licensees

in the 24 GHz band that were relocated

from the 18 GHz band, Teligent and

TRW, Inc. Both Teligent and TRW, Inc.

appear to have more than 1,500

employees. Therefore, it appears that no

incumbent licensee in the 24 GHz band

is a small business entity.

Future 24 GHz Licensees. The rules

that we may later adopt could also affect

potential new licensees on the 24 GHz

band. Pursuant to 47 CFR 24.720(b), the

Commission has defined ‘‘small

business’’ for Blocks C and F broadband

PCS licensees as firms that had average

gross revenues of less than $40 million

in the three previous calendar years.

This regulation defining ‘‘small

business’’ in the context of broadband

PCS auctions has been approved by the

SBA. With respect to new applicants in

the 24 GHz band, we shall use this

definition of ‘‘small business’’ and

apply it to the 24 GHz band under the

name ‘‘entrepreneur.’’ With regard to

‘‘small business,’’ we shall adopt the

definition of ‘‘very small business’’ used

for 39 GHz licenses and PCS C and F

block licenses: businesses with average

annual gross revenues for the three

preceding years not in excess of $15

million. Finally, ‘‘very small business’’

in the 24 GHz band shall be defined as

an entity with average gross revenues

not to exceed $3 million for the

preceding three years. The Commission

will not know how many licensees will

be small or very small businesses until

the auction, if required, is held. Even

after that, the Commission will not

know how many licensees will partition

their license areas or disaggregate their

spectrum blocks, if partitioning and

disaggregation are allowed.

39 GHz. The Commission held an

auction (Auction No. 30) for fixed pointto-point microwave licenses in the 38.6

to 40.0 GHz band (39 GHz Band). For

this auction, the Commission defined a

small business as an entity, together

with affiliates and controlling interests,

having average gross revenues for the

three preceding years of not more than

$40 million. A very small business was

defined as an entity, together with

affiliates and controlling principals,

having average gross revenues for the

three preceding years of not more than

$15 million. The SBA has approved

these definitions. Of the 29 winning

bidders in Auction No. 30, 18 bidders

(62%) were small business participants.

Multipoint Distribution Service

(MDS). This service involves a variety of

transmitters, which are used to relay

28416 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules

data and programming to the home or

office, similar to that provided by cable

television systems. In connection with

the 1996 MDS auction, the Commission

defined small businesses as entities that

had annual average gross revenues for

the three preceding years not in excess

of $40 million. This definition of a small

entity in the context of MDS auctions

has been approved by the SBA. These

stations were licensed prior to

implementation of section 309(j) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended. Licenses for new MDS

facilities are now awarded to auction

winners in Basic Trading Areas (BTAs)

and BTA-like areas. The MDS auctions

resulted in 67 successful bidders

obtaining licensing opportunities for

493 BTAs. Of the 67 auction winners, 61

meet the definition of a small business.

MDS is also heavily encumbered with

licensees of stations authorized prior to

the MDS auction. SBA has developed a

definition of small entities for pay

television services, which includes all

such companies generating $11 million

or less in annual receipts. This

definition includes MDS systems, and

thus applies to incumbent MDS

licensees and wireless cable operators

which may not have participated or

been successful in the MDS auction.

Information available to us indicates

that there are 832 of these licensees and

operators that do not generate revenue

in excess of $11 million annually.

Therefore, for purposes of this analysis,

we find there are approximately 892

small MDS providers as defined by the

SBA and the Commission’s auction

rules.

Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This

service operates on several UHF TV

broadcast channels that are not used for

TV broadcasting in the coastal area of

the states bordering the Gulf of Mexico.

At present, there are approximately 55

licensees in this service. We are unable

at this time to estimate the number of

licensees that would qualify as small

under the SBA’s definition for

radiotelephone communications.

Wireless Communications Services

(WCS). This service can be used for

fixed, mobile, radio-location and digital

audio broadcasting satellite uses. The

Commission defined ‘‘small business’’

for the WCS auction as an entity with

average gross revenues of $40 million

for each of the three preceding years,

and a ‘‘very small business’’ as an entity

with average gross revenues of $15

million for each of the three preceding

years. The Commission auctioned

geographic area licenses in the WCS

service. In the auction, there were seven

winning bidders that qualified as very

small business entities, and one

winning bidder that qualified as a small

business entity. We conclude that the

number of geographic area WCS

licensees affected includes these eight

entities.

General Wireless Communication

Service (GWCS). This service was

created by the Commission on July 31,

1995 by transferring 25 MHz of

spectrum in the 4660–4685 MHz band

from the federal government to private

sector use. The Commission sought and

obtained SBA approval of a refined

definition of ‘‘small business’’ for GWCS

in this band. According to this

definition, a small business is any

entity, together with its affiliates and

entities holding controlling interests in

the entity, that has average annual gross

revenues over the three preceding years

that are not more than $40 million. By

letter dated March 30, 1999, NTIA

reclaimed the spectrum allocated to

GWCS and identified alternative

spectrum at 4940–4990 MHz. On

February 23, 2000, the Commission

released its Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 00–32

proposing to allocate and establish

licensing and service rules for the 4.9

GHz band.

IV. Description of Projected Reporting,

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance

Requirements

There are certain transaction costs for

terminating access, including measuring

and billing. Under the existing CPNP

regime, the terminating LEC bills the

originating network, whereas under bill

and keep, the terminating LEC may bill

its own customers. The NPRM seeks

comment on the relative transaction

costs of each proposal, weighed against

the other efficiencies of the various

alternatives. Transaction costs can

increase under a bill-and-keep

arrangement, for example, since each

carrier may be responsible for

measuring and billing its own customers

for all traffic, rather than merely

measuring and billing the originating

carrier.

Apart from the transaction costs for

termination, the NPRM more broadly

suggests that a new regime could free

regulators from allocating transport

costs, and from setting the level and

structure of termination rates. Where

rates had once been set by regulation,

individual carriers, including small

entities, could inherit this

responsibility.

As a result of rules from this

proceeding, incumbent LECs and CLECs

may be required to discern the amount

of traffic carried on their networks that

is bound for ISPs. In addition, such

incumbent LECs and competitive

entrants may be required to produce

information regarding the costs of

carrying ISP-bound traffic on their

networks.

The NPRM seeks comment on the

extent to which a new regime would

comply with reciprocal compensation

obligations regarding traffic balances

and symmetrical rates. If rules should

follow on this issue, they may require

carriers to report traffic imbalances,

corresponding to rate symmetry. This is

especially true in the context of LECCMRS interconnection, in which the

NPRM seeks comment on the feasibility

of cost studies that CMRS carriers could

use to justify separate treatment.

V. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and

Significant Alternatives Considered

The RFA requires an agency to

describe any significant alternatives that

it has considered in reaching its

proposed approach, which may include

the following four alternatives (among

others): (1) The establishment of

differing compliance or reporting

requirements or timetables that take into

account the resources available to small

entities; (2) the clarification,

consolidation, or simplification of

compliance or reporting requirements

under the rule for small entities; (3) the

use of performance, rather than design,

standards; and (4) an exemption from

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof,

for small entities.

Although the transaction costs for

terminating access can increase under a

bill-and-keep arrangement, the impact

on small entities would be minimal

since measuring and billing is already a

fundamental component of their

operations. Furthermore, the advantages

of a bill-and-keep regime, in providing

clearer demarcations of cost between

carriers, appear to outweigh the

minimal increase in transaction costs

that could occur under bill and keep.

With regard to the related task of

allocating transport costs, the same

reasoning applies to small entities in

that the clearer demarcations between

carriers inherent in bill and keep

outweighs the potential burden of

setting the level and structure of

termination rates. Regardless, many

small entities are competitive entrants

such as CLECs, which currently enjoy

specific exemptions from ILEC rate

regulation.

A potential benefit may accrue to

small-entity LECs transporting ISPbound traffic. As discussed above, the

Commission may adopt rules that may

require incumbent LECs and CLECs to

discern the amount of traffic carried on

their networks that is bound for ISPs. As

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules 28417

a result of such rules, incumbent LECs

and CLECs, including small-entity

incumbent LECs and CLECs, will be

able to receive compensation for the

delivery of ISP-bound traffic that they

might not otherwise receive. The NPRM

separately requests comment on

alternative proposals.

The NPRM seeks comment on the

issue of asymmetrical compensation for

unbalanced traffic. Although small

entities could experience an increase in

reporting and recordkeeping when

submitting cost studies to this effect, if

adopted, such a requirement would

more accurately serve the revenue

requirements of small entities in

relation to larger competitors.

Finally, the NPRM seeks comment on

additional impacts on small entities that

may result from any new intercarrier

compensation regime. When seeking

comment on the alternative of

contractual arrangements for intercarrier

compensation, the NPRM asks

commenters to address the potential

impacts of such a market-based

approach on small entities, such as the

refusal to carry traffic.

VI. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,

Overlap or Conflict With the Proposed

Rules

None.

Comment Filing Procedures

Pursuant to sections 1.415, 1.419, and

1.430 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR

1.415, 1.419, 1.430, interested parties

may file comments within 90 days after

publication in the Federal Register, and

reply comments within 135 days after

publication in the Federal Register. All

filings should refer to CC Docket No.

01–92. Comments may be filed using the

Commission’s Electronic Comment

Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper

copies. Comments filed through the

ECFS can be sent as an electronic file

via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/efile/ecfs.html. Generally, only one copy

of an electronic submission must be

filed. In completing the transmittal

screen, commenters should include

their full name, Postal Service mailing

address, and the applicable docket

number, which in this instance is CC

Docket No. 01–92. Parties may also

submit an electronic comment by

Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions

for e-mail comments, commenters

should send an e-mail to

<ecfs@fcc.gov>, and should include the

following words in the body of the

message: ‘‘get form <your e-mail

address>.’’ A sample form and

directions will be sent in reply.

Parties who choose to file by paper

must file an original and four copies of

each filing. All filings must be sent to

the Commission’s Secretary, Magalie

Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary,

Federal Communications Commission,

Room TW–B204, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20554. Regardless of

whether parties choose to file

electronically or by paper, parties

should also serve: (1) Paul Moon,

Common Carrier Bureau, 445 12th

Street, SW., Room 3–C423, Washington,

DC 20554; (2) Jane Jackson, Common

Carrier Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room 5–A225, Washington, DC 20554;

and (3) the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc. (ITS), 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554,

(202) 857–3800, with copies of any

documents filed in this proceeding.

Comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center, Room CY–A257, 445

12th Street, SW., Washington, DC

20554.

Parties who choose to file by paper

should also submit their comments on

diskette. These diskettes should be

submitted to Wanda Harris, Common

Carrier Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room 5–A452, Washington, DC 20554.

Such a submission should be on a 3.5-

inch diskette formatted in a Windowscompatible format using Microsoft Word

or compatible software. The diskette

should be accompanied by a cover letter

and should be submitted in ‘‘read only’’

mode. The diskette should be clearly

labeled with the commenter’s name,

proceeding (including the docket

number—in this case, CC Docket No.

01–92), type of pleading (comment or

reply comment), date of submission,

and the name of the electronic file on

the diskette. The label should also

include the following phrase: ‘‘Disk

Copy—Not an Original.’’ Each diskette

should contain only one party’s

pleadings, preferably in a single

electronic file. In addition, commenters

must send diskette copies to the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20036.

Comments and reply comments must

include a short and concise summary of

the substantive arguments raised in the

pleading. Comments and reply

comments must also comply with

section 1.49 and all other applicable

sections of the Commission’s rules. We

also direct all interested parties to

include the name of the filing party and

the date of the filing on each page of

their comments and reply comments.

All parties are encouraged to utilize a

table of contents, regardless of the

length of their submission. We also

strongly encourage that parties track the

organization set forth in the NPRM to

facilitate our internal review process.

Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.200(a), which

permits the Commission to adopt

modified or more stringent ex parte

procedures in particular proceedings if

the public interest so requires, we

announce that this proceeding will be

governed by ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ ex

parte procedures that are applicable to

non-restricted proceedings under 47

CFR 1.1206. Designating this proceeding

as ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ will provide an

opportunity for all interested parties to

receive notice of the various technical,

legal, and policy issues raised in ex

parte presentations made to the

Commission in the course of this

proceeding. This will allow interested

parties to file responses or rebuttals to

proposals made on the record in this

proceeding. Accordingly, we find that it

is in the public interest to designate this

proceeding as ‘‘permit-but-disclose.’’

Parties making oral ex parte

presentations are reminded that

memoranda summarizing the

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. Other rules pertaining to oral

and written presentations are set forth

in section 1.206(b) as well. Interested

parties are to file any written ex parte

presentations in this proceeding with

the Commission Secretary, Magalie

Roman Salas, 445 12th Street, SW., TW–

B204, Washington, DC 20554, and serve

with copies: (1) Paul Moon, Common

Carrier Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW.,

Room 3–C423, Washington, DC 20554;

(2) Jane Jackson, Common Carrier

Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5–

A225, Washington, DC 20554; and (3)

International Transcription Service, Inc.

(ITS), 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–

B402, Washington, DC 20554, (202)

857–3800.

Because many of the matters on

which we request comment in this

NPRM may call on parties to disclose

proprietary information such as market

research and business or technical

plans, we suggest that parties consult 47

CFR 0.459 about the submission of

confidential information.

Ordering Clauses

The actions of the Commission herein

ARE TAKEN pursuant to sections 4,

201–202, 303 and 403 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 201–202, 303

28418 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Proposed Rules

and 403, and sections 1.1, 1.411 and

1.412 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR

1.1, 1.411 and 1.412.

The Commission’s Consumer

Information Bureau, Reference

Information Center, Shall Send a copy

of this NPRM, including the Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–12759 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P