71020 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 424—CONDITIONS FOR 

MEDICARE PAYMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 424 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the 

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and 

1395hh). 

■ 2. Amend § 424.32 by—

■ A. Revising paragraphs (d)(1)(v); 

(d)(1)(vi); (d)(3)(ii), and (d)(4) 

introductory text. 

■ B. Redesignating (d)(4)(iii) as 

paragraph (d)(4)(v). 

■ C. Adding paragraphs (d)(4)(iii) and 

(iv). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 424.32 Basic requirements for all claims. 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(v) Initial Medicare claim means a 

claim submitted to Medicare for 

payment under Part A or Part B of the 

Medicare Program under title XVIII of 

the Act for initial processing, including 

claims sent to Medicare for the first time 

for secondary payment purposes. Initial 

Medicare claim excludes any 

adjustment or appeal of a previously 

submitted claim, and claims submitted 

for payment under Part C of the 

Medicare program under title XVIII of 

the Act. 

(vi) Physician, practitioner, facility, or 

supplier is a Medicare provider or 

supplier other than a provider of 

services. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(ii) The entity submitting the claim is 

a small provider of services or small 

supplier. 

(4) Unusual cases. The Secretary may 

waive the requirement of paragraph 

(d)(2) of this section in unusual cases as 

the Secretary finds appropriate. Unusual 

cases are deemed to exist in the 

following situations: 

* * * * * 

(iii) The entity submitting the claim 

submits fewer than 10 claims to 

Medicare per month, on average. 

(iv) The entity submitting the claim 

only furnishes services outside of the 

U.S. territory. 

* * * * * 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program No. 93.774, Medicare—

Supplementary Medical Insurance Program) 

Dated: May 2, 2005. 

Mark B. McClellan, 

Administrator, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services. 

Approved: August 15, 2005. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Federal Register on 

November 17, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 05–23080 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES (HHS) 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

45 CFR Parts 144, 146, 148, and 150 

[CMS–4091–F] 

RIN 0938–AN35 

Federal Enforcement in Group and 

Individual Health Insurance Markets 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule makes final an 

interim final rule that details procedures 

we use for enforcing title XXVII of the 

Public Health Service Act as added by 

the Health Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996, and as 

amended by the Mental Health Parity 

Act of 1996, the Newborns’ and 

Mothers’ Health Protection Act of 1996, 

and the Women’s Health and Cancer 

Rights Act of 1998. Specifically, we are 

responsible for enforcing title XXVII 

requirements in States that do not enact 

the legislation necessary to enforce 

those requirements, or otherwise fail to 

substantially enforce the requirements. 

We are also responsible for taking 

enforcement actions against non-Federal 

governmental plans. The regulation 

describes the process we use in both 

enforcement contexts. This final rule 

deletes an appendix to the interim rule 

that listed examples of violations of title 

XXVII and corrects the description of a 

cross-reference, but makes no 

substantive changes to the interim final 

rule. 

DATES: These regulations are effective 

on December 27, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Mlawsky (877) 267–2323, ext. 

61565. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. Background 

Title I of the Health Insurance 

Portability and Accountability Act of 

1996 (HIPAA) created a new title XXVII 

of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act 

(42 U.S.C. 300gg, et seq.) that requires 

group health plans and health insurance 

issuers to provide certain guarantees for 

availability and renewability of health 

coverage in the group and individual 

health insurance markets. 

HIPAA created a series of parallel 

provisions that were placed in the 

Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act (ERISA), which is within the 

jurisdiction of the Department of Labor; 

the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, 

which is within the jurisdiction of the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services; and the Internal Revenue 

Code, which is within the jurisdiction of 

the Department of the Treasury. These 

‘‘shared provisions’’ set forth Federal 

requirements relating to portability of 

and access to group health plan 

coverage, as well as group health 

insurance coverage provided by issuers. 

The shared provisions contain rules 

limiting the use of preexisting condition 

exclusion periods, and prohibiting 

discrimination against participants and 

beneficiaries based on health status. 

Section 104 of Title I of HIPAA 

requires that the Secretaries of the three 

Departments ensure through an 

interagency Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) that regulations, 

rulings, and interpretations issued by 

each of the Departments relating to the 

same matter over which two or more 

departments have jurisdiction, are 

administered so as to have the same 

effect at all times. Under section 104, 

the Departments, through the MOU, are 

to provide for coordination of policies 

relating to enforcement of the same 

requirements in order to have a 

coordinated enforcement strategy that 

avoids duplication of enforcement 

efforts and assigns priorities in 

enforcement. The Secretaries of the 

three departments signed and published 

the MOU in 1999 (64 FR 70164). 

HIPAA also added certain provisions 

governing insurance in the group and 

individual markets, and with respect to 

non-Federal governmental plans, which 

are contained only in the Public Health 

Service Act and are not within the 

regulatory jurisdiction of the 

Department of Labor or the Department 

of the Treasury. 

Under section 101(b) of HIPAA the 

Department of Labor is not authorized to 

enforce any of the portability 

requirements of part 7 of ERISA (the 

‘‘shared’’ provisions) against a health 

insurance issuer offering health 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 71021 

insurance coverage in connection with a 

group health plan, although individuals 

covered under ERISA can bring suit 

against the issuer. Also, governmental 

plans, while they are defined in section 

3(32) of ERISA, are exempt from ERISA 

requirements. (See section 4(b)(1) of 

ERISA.) Thus, the scope of the MOU is 

limited, with respect to coordination of 

enforcement activities, to enforcement 

of shared provisions. Enforcement of 

these provisions constitutes only a 

relatively small portion of our 

responsibilities. 

The Newborns’ and Mothers’ Health 

Protection Act of 1996 (NMHPA) 

amended the PHS Act and ERISA (with 

corresponding provisions in the Tax 

Code) to provide protections for mothers 

and their newborn children with regard 

to the length of hospital stay following 

childbirth. The Mental Health Parity Act 

of 1996 (MHPA) further amended the 

PHS Act and ERISA (with 

corresponding provisions in the Tax 

Code) to provide for parity in the 

application of certain annual and 

lifetime dollar limits on mental health 

benefits with annual and lifetime dollar 

limits on medical/surgical benefits. The 

Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act 

of 1998 (WHCRA) amended the PHS Act 

(and ERISA) to provide certain 

protections for patients who elect breast 

reconstruction in connection with a 

mastectomy. (As used hereafter in this 

preamble, ‘‘HIPAA’’ refers to title XXVII 

of the PHS Act, as added by the Health 

Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996, and later 

amended by MHPA, NMHPA, and 

WHCRA). 

HIPAA added two preemption 

provisions to the PHS Act. With respect 

to HIPAA’s preexisting condition 

exclusion rules, and the special 

enrollment rights contained in section 

2701 of the PHS Act, State law cannot 

differ in any way from the Federal 

requirements, except to expand the 

protections in one of several ways 

specifically permitted by the statute. 

(See section 2723(b) of the PHS Act.) 

With respect to HIPAA’s other 

requirements (except for NMHPA and 

WHCRA), including the nondiscrimination provisions in section 

2702 of the PHS Act, State laws are 

preempted only to the extent they 

prevent the application of any 

requirement of HIPAA. (See section 

2723(a) of the PHS Act.) In addition, the 

NMHPA does not apply to health 

insurance issuers in States that have 

certain types of laws regulating coverage 

for the length of post-childbirth 

hospitalization. WHCRA does not 

preempt State laws in effect on the date 

of WHCRA’s enactment with respect to 

health insurance coverage that requires 

coverage of at least the coverage of 

reconstructive breast surgery otherwise 

required under WHCRA. 

HIPAA affirms that the States are the 

primary regulators of health insurance 

coverage in each State. However, in the 

event that a State either does not enact 

legislation that meets or exceeds the 

Federal requirements, or if it otherwise 

fails to substantially enforce the HIPAA 

standards, we enforce the HIPAA 

requirements that apply to health 

insurance issuers offering coverage 

within that State. 

We are also responsible for enforcing 

the HIPAA requirements with respect to 

non-Federal governmental plans. NonFederal governmental plans that selfinsure, rather than purchasing health 

insurance coverage may elect exemption 

from one or more requirements of 

HIPAA, but must comply with 

requirements regarding certification and 

disclosure of creditable coverage. 

II. Provisions of the Interim Final 

Regulations 

Subpart A—General Provisions 

Section 150.101 Basis and Scope 

On April 8, 1997, we published 

regulations to implement HIPAA by 

adding 45 CFR parts 144, 146, and 148. 

Included in those regulations were 

enforcement provisions. After gaining 

some experience with direct Federal 

enforcement in some States, we 

determined that it was necessary to 

provide more detail on the procedures 

that will be used to enforce HIPAA 

when a State does not do so. Therefore, 

on August 20, 1999, we published 

interim final regulations (HCFA–2019–

IFC) (64 FR 45786) that added a new 

part that revised and expanded the 

provisions contained in § 146.184, 

§ 148.200, and § 148.202. Those sections 

were deleted. 

That new part, 45 CFR part 150, 

consists of four subparts. Subpart A 

explains the basis and scope of the 

regulation and presents definitions that 

supplement definitions located in 45 

CFR 144.103 and 148.103. Subpart B 

describes how we determine whether to 

assume enforcement authority in a State 

and explains the process for transferring 

authority back to the State. Subpart C 

describes procedures for assessing civil 

money penalties. Examples of specific 

situations that may trigger the 

assessment are listed in Appendix A to 

subpart C. Subpart D describes the 

administrative appeals process. 

We refer the reader to the August 20, 

1999, interim final rule with comment 

period for greater detail. 

III. Analysis of and Responses to Public 

Comments 

We received no public comments on 

the August 20, 1999 interim final rule. 

IV. Provisions of the Final Regulations 

The provisions of this final rule are 

identical to the provisions of the August 

20, 1999, interim final rule with 

comment period, except that we have 

deleted the appendix to subpart C that 

listed examples of specific situations 

that may trigger the assessment of civil 

money penalties. We believe the 

inclusion of that document is 

unnecessary, in light of the fact that 

assessments are triggered by breaches of 

the provisions within the regulation 

itself. 

Additionally, in § 150.311(e), the 

cross-reference made to the document 

described in § 150.307 incorrectly 

identified that document as the notice of 

intent to assess a penalty. We are 

correcting that cross-reference in 

150.311(e) so it references the notice to 

the responsible entity or entities 

described in § 150.307. 

V. Collection of Information 

Requirements 

This document does not impose 

information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Consequently, it need not be reviewed 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget under the authority of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

VI. Regulatory Impact Statement 

In drafting the interim regulation that 

this regulation finalizes, we had 

examined the impacts of the interim 

final regulation as required by Executive 

Order 12866 (September 1993, 

Regulatory Planning and Review), the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354), 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), and Executive 

Order 13132. We published a Regulatory 

Impact Statement addressing all those 

impacts in the preamble to the interim 

regulation (64 FR 45786, 45792). This 

regulation merely finalizes that interim 

final regulation, and makes no 

substantive changes to it. Therefore, that 

Regulatory Impact Statement applies to 

this final regulation as well, and we 

refer the reader to it. However, we note 

that under Executive Order 12866 (58 

FR 551735, October 4, 1993), the 

Department must determine whether a 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and 

therefore subject to the requirements of 

the Executive Order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Under section 3(f), the 

order defines a ‘‘significant regulatory 

71022 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

1Missouri. 

2Wisconsin. 

3Colorado, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and 

Wisconsin. 4Additionally, HHS applied the process set forth 

in the interim final regulation (and in this final 

regulation) with regard to several other States that 

had not enacted legislation conforming to NMHPA, 

WHCRA and MHPA. Largely as a result of initiating 

that process and working cooperatively with those 

States, every one of them enacted conforming 

legislation. 

action’’ as an action that is likely to 

result in a rule (1) having an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more, or adversely and materially 

affecting a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities (also referred to as 

‘‘economically significant’’); (2) creating 

serious inconsistency or otherwise 

interfering with an action taken or 

planned by another agency; (3) 

materially altering the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) 

raising novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. We 

have determined that this action is not 

economically significant for the reasons 

stated in the preamble to the interim 

final regulation. The action also does 

not create any serious inconsistency or 

interfere with another agency’s action or 

planned action, nor does it materially 

alter any budgetary impacts of 

entitlement grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations of 

recipients thereof. Additionally, because 

this final regulation merely keeps in 

force an interim regulation already in 

effect before the publication of this final 

regulation, and makes no substantive 

changes to it, this final regulation does 

not raise any novel legal or policy 

issues. 

We also note that Executive Order 

12612 (‘‘Federalism’’) has been revoked 

subsequent to the issuance of the 

interim final regulation, and has been 

replaced by Executive Order 13132 

(‘‘Federalism’’). Executive Order 13132 

outlines fundamental principles of 

Federalism. It requires adherence to 

specific criteria by federal agencies in 

formulating and implementing policies 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects’’ on 

the States, the relationship between the 

national government and States, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Federal agencies 

promulgating regulations that have 

these federalism implications must 

consult with State and local officials, 

and describe the extent of their 

consultation and the nature of the 

concerns of State and local officials in 

the preamble to the regulation. 

In the Department’s view, these final 

regulations have Federalism 

implications because they may have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

the relationship between the national 

government and States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. This is because 

the process set forth in these regulations 

impacts the relationship between 

national government and the States. 

However, in the Department’s view, the 

Federalism implications of these final 

regulations are minimal. This is 

evidenced by the fact that no State 

submitted any comments on the interim 

final regulations suggesting that the 

regulations would in fact materially 

impact States’ relationship with the 

national government, or would unduly 

infringe on States’ historical function of 

regulating health insurance issuers. 

Additionally, the Department notes that 

the PHS Act provides that the States 

may enforce the provisions of title 

XXVII as they pertain to issuers, but that 

the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services must enforce any provisions 

that a State fails to substantially enforce. 

Currently, HHS enforces the title XXVII 

group market portability and 

nondiscrimination provisions in only 

one State 1 in accordance with that 

State’s specific request to do so. 

Additionally, HHS enforces the NMHPA 

provisions in title XXVII in one State 2

that has not enacted conforming 

legislation, and has varying levels of 

direct enforcement responsibility in four 

States 3 with respect to the WHCRA 

provisions in title XXVII. In these 

instances, the Department complied 

with the procedures set forth in the 

interim final regulation (and this 

regulation) before assuming such 

enforcement responsibilities.4 When 

exercising its responsibilities in this 

regard, HHS works cooperatively with 

the State for the purpose of addressing 

the State’s concerns and avoiding 

conflicts with the exercise of State 

authority. 

In compliance with Executive Order 

13132’s requirements that agencies 

examine closely any policies that may 

have Federalism implications or limit 

the policymaking discretion of the 

States, HHS has engaged in numerous 

efforts to consult and work 

cooperatively with affected State and 

local officials. For example, the 

Department has worked closely with 

State insurance regulators and the 

National Association of Insurance 

Commissioners (NAIC). The NAIC is a 

non-profit corporation established by 

the insurance commissioners of the 50 

States, the District of Columbia, and 

four U.S. territories. In most States the 

insurance commissioner is appointed by 

the Governor, in approximately 14 

States, the insurance commissioner is an 

elected official. Among other activities, 

it provides a forum for the development 

of uniform policy when uniformity is 

appropriate. Its members meet, discuss 

and offer solutions to mutual problems. 

The NAIC sponsors quarterly meetings 

to provide a forum for the exchange of 

ideas and in-depth consideration of 

insurance issues by regulators, industry 

representatives and consumers. CMS 

staff have been consistently attending 

these quarterly meetings to listen to the 

concerns of the State Insurance 

Departments regarding HIPAA 

enforcement and other issues. In 

addition to the general discussions, 

committee meetings, and task groups, 

the NAIC sponsors the standing CMS/ 

Department of Labor meeting on HIPAA 

issues for members during the quarterly 

conferences. This meeting provides 

CMS (and the Department of Labor) 

with the opportunity to provide updates 

on enforcement actions, regulations, 

bulletins, and outreach efforts regarding, 

among other things, title XXVII of the 

PHS Act. 

The Department has also cooperated 

with the States in several ongoing 

outreach initiatives, through which 

information on, among other things, title 

XXVII of the PHS Act, is shared among 

Federal regulators, State regulators, and 

the regulated community. In particular, 

CMS has sponsored conferences with 

the States—the consumer Outreach and 

Advocacy conferences in March 1999 

and June 2000, and the Implementation 

and Enforcement of HIPAA National 

State-Federal Conferences in August 

1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. 

Furthermore, CMS websites offer links 

to important State websites and other 

resources, facilitating coordination 

between State and federal regulators and 

the regulated community. Throughout 

the process of developing these 

regulations, to the extent feasible, the 

Department has attempted to balance 

the States’ interests in regulating health 

insurance issuers, and Congress’ intent 

to ensure federal enforcement of the 

provisions of title XXVII in instances 

where a State fails to substantially 

enforce those provisions. 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in section 8(a) of Executive Order 

13132, and by the signatures affixed to 

these final regulations, the Department 

certifies that the CMS has complied 

with the requirements of Executive 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 71023 

Order 13132 for the attached final 

regulation, Federal Enforcement in 

Group and Individual Health Insurance 

Markets (RIN 09–38–AN35), in a 

meaningful and timely manner. 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12866, this regulation was reviewed by 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects 

45 CFR Parts 144 and 146 

Health care, Health insurance, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

45 CFR Part 148 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Health care, Health 

insurance, Penalties, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

45 CFR Part 150 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Health care, Health 

insurance, Penalties, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

■ Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

in the preamble, the interim final rule 

with comment period adding 45 CFR 

Part 150, Subparts A through D, which 

was published on August 20, 1999, in 

the Federal Register at 64 FR 45786 

through 45807, is adopted as a final 

rule, with the following amendments: 

PART 150—CMS ENFORCEMENT IN 

GROUP AND INDIVIDUAL INSURANCE 

MARKETS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 150 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 2701 through 2763, 2791, 

and 2792 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg 

through 300gg–63, 300gg–91, and 300gg–92). 

§ 150.307 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 150.307, paragraph (a) is 

amended by removing the parenthetical 

‘‘(See Appendix A to this subpart for 

examples of violations.)’’

§ 150.311 [Amended] 

■ 3. In § 150.311, paragraph (e) is 

amended by removing the phrase ‘‘of 

intent to assess a penalty’’ and adding 

in its place the phrase ‘‘to the 

responsible entity or entities’’. 

Appendix A To Subpart C [Removed] 

■ 4. In Part 150, ‘‘Appendix A To 

Subpart C Of Part 150—Examples Of 

Violations’’ is removed. 

Dated: January 19, 2005. 

Mark B. McClellan, 

Administrator, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicare Services. 

Dated: August 15, 2005. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary, Department of Health & Human 

Services. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Federal Register on 

November 17, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 05–23076 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–U 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 11 

[EB Docket No. 04–296; FCC 05–191] 

Review of the Emergency Alert System 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) adopts rules that expand 

the reach of the Emergency Alert System 

(EAS), as currently constituted, to cover 

digital communications technologies 

that are increasingly being used by the 

American public to receive news and 

entertainment—digital television and 

radio, digital cable, and satellite 

television and radio. This First Report 

and Order is the most recent in a series 

of proceedings in which the 

Commission has sought to contribute to 

an efficient and technologically current 

public alert and warning system. 

DATES: Effective Date: The rules set forth 

in the First Report and Order shall 

become effective for digital television 

broadcasters, digital audio broadcasters, 

digital cable systems and SDARS 

licensees on December 31, 2006, and for 

DBS providers on May 31, 2007, except 

§§ 11.15, 11.21, 11.35, 11.51, 11.52, 

11.55 and 11.61 which contains 

information that has not been approved 

by OMB. The Commission will publish 

a document in the Federal Register 

announcing the effective dates of these 

sections. 

Comment Date: Written comments by 

the public on the new and/or modified 

information collection requirements are 

due January 24, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Room TW–A325, Washington, DC 

20554. You may submit your Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) comments by 

electronic mail or U.S. mail. To submit 

your PRA comments by electronic mail, 

send comments to: PRA@fcc.gov. To 

submit your PRA comments by U.S. 

mail, mark them to the attention of 

Judith B. Herman and address them to 

the Federal Communications 

Commission, Room 1–C804, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean 

Ann Collins, Senior Counsel, Office of 

Homeland Security, Enforcement 

Bureau, at (202) 418–1199. For 

additional information concerning the 

Paperwork Reduction Act information 

collection requirements contained in 

this document, send an e-mail to 

PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B. 

Herman at (202) 418–0214. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s First 

Report and Order in EB Docket No. 04–

296, FCC 05–191, adopted November 3, 

2005, and released November 10, 2005. 

The complete text of this document is 

available for inspection and copying 

during normal business hours in the 

FCC Reference Information Center, 

Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This 

document may also be purchased from 

the Commission’s duplicating 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 

445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 

378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile 

(202) 863–2898, or via e-mail at http:// 

www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available 

on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.fcc.gov. This document 

contains new information collection 

requirements. The Commission, as part 

of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork burdens, invites the general 

public to comment on the information 

collection requirements contained in 

this document as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13. Public and agency 

comments are due January 24, 2006. In 

addition, the Commission notes that 

pursuant to the Small Business 

Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public 

Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), 

the Commission previously sought 

specific comment on how the 

Commission might ‘‘further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees.’’

In this present document, the 

Commission has assessed the effects of 

expanding the reach of EAS to cover 

DTV, DAB, digital cable, DBS and 

SDARS providers, and finds that this 

imposes minimal regulation on small 

entities to the extent consistent with the 

Commission’s goal of advancing its 

public safety mission.