11644 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

concluding at 12 noon, except the

Duluth meeting which will begin at 2

p.m. and conclude at 4:30 p.m., and the

Milwaukee meeting which will begin at

1 p.m. and conclude at 3:30 p.m., and

will be at the following dates and

places: March 7, 1995, in the conference

room of the Seaway Port Authority of

Duluth, 1200 Port Terminal Drive,

Duluth, Minnesota; March 14, 1995, in

the conference room of the Port of

Milwaukee, 2323 South Lincoln

Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin;

April 5, 1995, in the conference room of

Burns International Harbor, 6600 U.S.

Highway 12, Portage, Indiana; April 11,

1995, in the conference room of the Port

Authority Office, 1 Maritime Plaza,

Toledo, Ohio; and April 26, 1995, in the

board room of the Ogdensburg Bridge

and Port Authority, Bridge Plaza,

Ogdensburg, New York.

Issued at Washington, D.C. on February 24,

1995.

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development

Corporation.

Marc C. Owen,

Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 95–5144 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–61–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 2

[ET Docket No. 95–18; FCC 95–39]

Allocation of Spectrum at 2 GHz for

Use by the Mobile-Satellite Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: By this Notice of Proposed

Rule Making, the Commission proposes

to allocate 70 megahertz of spectrum at

1990–2025 MHz and 2165–2200 MHz to

the Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS). This

proposal responds to petitions filed by

Celsat, Inc., TRW, and the Personal

Communications Satellite Corporation

for spectrum in the 2 GHz range to

operate satellites providing personal

communications services. This Notice of

Proposed Rule Making solicits comment

on the proposed allocation, including

the necessity and means of moving

incumbent Broadcast Auxiliary Service

and microwave licensees to another

band; on technical requirements for

MSS in the proposed bands; and on

awarding MSS licenses in the proposed

bands by competitive bidding.

COMMENT DATES: Comments are due

March 9, 1995. Reply comments are due

March 27, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean White, Office of Engineering and

Technology, (202) 776–1624.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, adopted January

30, 1995, and released January 31, 1995.

The full text of this Commission

decision is available for inspection and

copying during regular business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street NW., Washington,

DC. The complete text of this decision

also may be purchased from the

Commission’s duplication contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street

NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Summary of Notice of Proposed Rule

Making

1. In this Notice of Proposed Rule

Making, the Commission proposes to

allocate 70 megahertz of spectrum at

1990–2025 MHz and 2165–2200 MHz to

the Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS). The

1992 World Administrative Radio

Conference (WARC–92) allocated the

1970–1980 MHz (Earth-to-space) and

2160–2170 MHz (space-to-Earth) bands

in Region 2 and the 1980–2010 MHz

(Earth-to-space) and 2170–2200 MHz

(space-to-Earth) bands worldwide to

MSS. In the June 1994 Memorandum

Opinion and Order in GEN Docket No.

90–314, 59 FR 32830, June 24, 1994, we

allocated the 1850–1990 MHz band to

terrestrial broadband personal

communications services (PCS).

Because of this, it does not appear to be

practicable to make a domestic

allocation of 2 GHz spectrum for MSS

that is consistent with the international

allocation without jeopardizing the

availability of spectrum for PCS.

2. We believe that a need exists for

allocating a substantial amount of

spectrum for MSS. There is significant

consumer demand for convenient

mobile services such as telephone, highrate data and fax, and video. MSS can

provide such communications in remote

or rural areas not covered by

terrestrially based mobile services, and

can provide nationwide public safety

coverage. We also believe that use of 2

GHz frequencies can help minimize

transmission costs and ensure a

relatively low cost service that will be

within the economic reach of a large

segment of the population. Thus, the

proposed allocation of 70 MHz of

spectrum to MSS should give the

public, especially rural Americans,

access to new and competitive services

and technologies.

3. Any 2 GHz MSS allocation should

be as consistent as possible with the

WARC–92 worldwide MSS allocation,

to help ensure a truly universal service.

We therefore believe that incorporating

use of the 1990–2010 MHz and 2170–

2200 MHz bands allocated for MSS by

WARC–92 is desirable. At the same

time, we believe that 70 megahertz is

needed to accommodate all MSS

demand, and so propose to allocate

1990–2025 MHz and 2165–2200 MHz to

MSS.

4. This allocation would require that

the candidate bands be cleared of

Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS)

incumbents in the 1990–2025 MHz

band. In order to accommodate these

incumbents, we propose to add 35

megahertz at the upper end of the BAS

spectrum to offset the 35 megahertz we

are allocating to MSS, making the BAS

allocation 2025–2145 MHz. MSS

providers would have to bear the costs

of moving BAS licensees to their new

band. The proposed MSS allocation

would also require relocation of

microwave incumbents. We addressed

this issue in the First Report and Order

and Third Notice of Proposed Rule

Making in ET Docket No. 92–9, 58 FR

46457, September 2, 1993, and propose

to follow the same procedures, requiring

that MSS licensees bear the entire cost

of relocating BAS and microwave

incumbents in the 1990–2025 MHz and

2165–2200 MHz bands.

5. The Commission solicits public

comment on the proposed allocation,

the proposal to relocate BAS and

microwave incumbents, any other

sharing or technical matters pertinent to

the proposed allocation, and our

proposal to allocate licenses in the

proposed MSS spectrum by competitive

bidding.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 2

Frequency allocations and radio treaty

matters, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5128 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

47 CFR Part 63

[IB Docket No. 95–22, FCC 95–53]

Foreign-Affiliated Entities: In the

Matter of Market Entry and Regulation

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission is proposing to modify its

approach to determining the public

interest in cases where a foreign carrier
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11645

or its affiliate applies for authority

under Section 214 of the

Communications Act to enter the U.S.

market to provide international

facilities-based services. In reviewing

such applications, the Commission

proposes to examine whether effective

market access is available, or will soon

be available, to U.S. carriers in the

primary markets of the foreign carrier

seeking entry. This would be an

important element of the Commission’s

public interest determination. In

addition, the Commission requests

comment on whether it should modify

certain aspects of its regulation of U.S.

international carriers. It also clarifies

and requests comment on its definition

of an international facilities-based

carrier. Finally, the Commission asks

whether it should incorporate the

proposed effective market access test as

an important element of the Section

310(b)(4) public interest analysis it

applies to foreign entities seeking to

acquire an indirect ownership interest

in U.S. radio licenses. The proposals

contained in the Notice are intended to

establish standard rules to regulate

foreign carrier entry into the U.S.

marketplace in order to promote

effective global competition, prevent

anti-competitive conduct and encourage

foreign governments to open their

communications markets.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before March 28, 1995. Reply

comments must be submitted on or

before April 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: All comments and reply

comments concerning these proposals

should be addressed to: Office of the

Secretary, Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

Comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room 239) of the

Federal Communications Commission,

1919 M St., NW., Washington, DC

20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Troy F. Tanner or Susan Lee O’Connell,

Attorney-Advisors, Policy and Facilities

Branch, Telecommunications Division,

International Bureau, (202) 418–1470.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking adopted on

February 7, 1995 and released February

17, 1995. The full text of this Notice is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919

M St., NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text of this Notice also may be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M

Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC.

20037.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

A. Reason for Action

This rulemaking proceeding is

initiated to obtain comment regarding

proposed changes to the Commission’s

entry standard for foreign carriers

desiring to enter the U.S. international

telecommunications market, as well as

changes to the Commission’s public

interest standard for foreign entities that

seek to acquire an indirect interest in a

U.S. common carrier, aeronautical, or

broadcast radio license. Comment is

also requested on proposed

modifications to the Commission’s

dominant carrier safeguards as well as

to other non-discrimination safeguards.

Comment is also sought on the

Commission’s definition of an

international facilities-based carrier.

B. Objectives

The Commission seeks to establish

standard rules and procedures to

regulate foreign entry into the U.S.

marketplace in order to promote

effective competition and prevent anticompetitive conduct in the market for

international communications services,

as well as to encourage foreign

governments to open their

communications markets.

C. Legal Basis

The proposed action is authorized

under Sections 4 and 303(r) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154, 303(r).

D. Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements

The actions contained in this Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking may affect

large and small carriers. We propose to

require that dominant, foreign-affiliated

carriers maintain or provide certain

records regarding their foreign carrier

affiliates. These U.S. carriers may be

required to comply with proposed

requirements to file certain reports, but

this is not estimated to be a significant

economic burden for these entities.

E. Federal Rules That Overlap,

Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules

None.

F. Description, Potential Impact, and

Number of Small Entities Involved

To the extent that the proposals

discussed in this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking propose to make equity

investment by foreign carriers in U.S.

carriers more difficult, carriers seeking

foreign investment greater than the

proposed threshold will be adversely

affected. These proposals are intended

to ensure that U.S. carriers can compete

effectively in international markets and

to open closed foreign markets. Copies

of this Notice will be sent to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

G. Any Significant Alternatives

Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities

Consistent With the Stated Objectives

The Notice solicits comment on a

variety of alternatives to achieve

Commission objectives.

Summary of Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

proposes new policies governing the

participation of foreign carriers in the

U.S. international telecommunications

market. The Commission proposes three

goals of its regulation of the U.S.

international telecommunications

market: (1) To promote effective

competition in the global market for

communications services; (2) to prevent

anticompetitive conduct in the

provision of international services or

facilities; and (3) to encourage foreign

governments to open their

communications markets. The

Commission considers how to achieve

these goals through implementation of

Sections 214 and 310 of the

Communications Act. The Commission

finds that allowing foreign carrier entry

into the U.S. international services

market will further the public interest

by providing additional competition

that will benefit consumers. The

Commission tentatively concludes,

however, that unrestricted foreign

carrier facilities-based entry is not in the

public interest when U.S. carriers do not

have effective opportunities to compete

in the provision of services and facilities

in the foreign carrier’s primary markets.

The Commission proposes to modify

its public interest standard for

considering foreign carrier applications

under Section 214 of the Act to enter the

U.S. market to provide international

facilities-based services. The

Commission seeks comment on

requiring as an important element of its

public interest standard a demonstration

that effective market access is, or will

soon be, available to U.S. carriers

seeking to provide basic, international

telecommuncations facilities-based

services in the primary markets served

by the carrier desiring entry. The

Commission also would continue to

consider other factors as part of its

public interest analysis, such as national

security, the openness of other

telecommunications segments of the
11646 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

foreign carrier’s primary markets, and

the ability and incentives of the foreign

carrier to discriminate against

unaffiliated U.S. carriers.

In addition, the Notice proposes a

specified level of foreign carrier

ownership in a U.S. carrier at which the

proposed entry standard would apply.

The Commission asks whether it is

desirable to consider an applicant to be

‘‘affiliated’’ with a foreign carrier for

purposes of the new rules when the

foreign carrier acquires an ownership

interest of a certain minimum level or

a controlling interest at any level. The

Notice requests comment on whether

the minimum level of ownership should

be set at greater than ten percent,

twenty-five percent, or some other level

of the capital stock of the applicant.

The Commission also seeks comment

on whether the affiliation standard it

adopts should replace the current

affiliation standard it uses for purposes

of classifying an affiliated U.S. carrier as

dominant or nondominant on a

particular U.S. international route,

based on the market power of its foreign

carrier affiliate on the foreign end of the

route. In addition, the Commission

requests comment on whether certain

safeguards applied to dominant carriers

should be modified to improve their

effectiveness. It additionally asks for

comment on other proposed

nondiscrimination safeguards, including

safeguards that would apply to all U.S.

international carriers. The Commission

also clarifies the definition of a

facilities-based carrier and requests

comment on its proposal to codify that

definition in this proceeding.

Finally, the Notice asks whether the

goals of the proceeding would be served

by incorporating the proposed effective

market access test as an element of the

Section 310(b)(4) public interest

analysis applicable to foreign entities

seeking to acquire an indirect

ownership interest of more than 25

percent in U.S. radio licensees. Thus,

the Notice asks whether the

Commission’s evaluation of the public

interest should consider whether the

primary markets of the foreign entity

offer effective market access to U.S.

licensees to provide the same type of

radio-based services as requested in the

United States. The Notice also seeks

comment on other public interest factors

the Commission should consider.

The Notice seeks public comment on

whether these proposals are

administratively feasible and whether

these approaches or other alternatives

will best serve the Commission’s goals.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 63

Communications common carriers.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5127 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

48 CFR Parts 933 and 970

Regulation Identifier Number 1991–

AB20 Acquisition Regulation;

Department of Energy Management

and Operating Contracts

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE) today issues a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking to amend the Department of

Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR)

to modify requirements for management

and operating contractor purchasing

systems. DEAR subpart 970.71 will be

revised to identify certain purchasing

system objectives and standards;

eliminate the application of the

‘‘Federal norm’’; and place greater

reliance on commercial practices.

DATES: Written comments on the

proposed rulemaking must be received

on or before May 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed

rulemaking should be addressed to the

U.S. Department of Energy, Director,

Procurement and Property Review and

Evaluation Division (HR–525.1),

Attention: James J. Cavanagh, 1000

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20585.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James J. Cavanagh, Director,

Procurement and Property Review and

Evaluation Division (HR–525.1), U.S.

Department of Energy, 1000

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585; telephone 202–

586–8257.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background.

II. Section-by-Section Analysis.

III. Public Comments.

IV. Procedural Requirements.

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866.

B. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act.

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction

Act.

D. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility

Act.

E. Review Under Executive Order 12612.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12778.

G. Public Hearing Determination.

I. Background

The Government-wide approach to

evaluating contractor purchasing

systems, as set forth in Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart

44.301, is to ‘‘evaluate the efficiency

and effectiveness with which the

contractor spends Government funds

and complies with the Government

policy when subcontracting.’’ Most

Federal contracts require purchases to

be made in accordance with the

applicable laws and the terms and

conditions of the contract, with minimal

references back to acquisition

regulations. The policy for the extent of

reviews of these purchasing systems is

set forth at FAR 44.303.

Unlike other contractors, however, a

DOE management and operating

contractor historically has been

expected to conform its purchasing

practices to the ‘‘Federal norm.’’ As

provided at the DEAR 970.7103, the

Federal norm is an ‘‘evolving concept’’,

which attempts to balance commercial

purchasing practices with Federal

procurement principles embodied in

law and regulation. The DEAR identifies

a number of tenets of Federal policy and

practices to which DOE’s management

and operating contractors must adhere.

As a result of the Federal norm, and

iterations of related reviews, audits, and

protest decisions, management and

operating contractor purchasing has,

over the years, become increasingly

Federal-like, replacing efficient and

effective commercial business practices.

In accordance with the objectives of

the National Performance Review and

the Secretary of Energy’s Contract

Reform Team Report, the Department

intends to revise its expectations for

management and operating contractor

purchasing systems by eliminating the

concept of the ‘‘Federal norm.’’ In lieu

of the detailed tenets contained in

DEAR subpart 970.71, which have

resulted in the inefficient layering of

non-commercial systems and practices,

the Department has identified certain

purchasing system objectives and

standards which it believes are common

to superior purchasing activities,

whether they be commercial or public.

In addition, as the Department

eliminates the concept of the ‘‘Federal

norm,’’ the Department intends that any

disagreements with management and

operating contractor purchasing

decision(s) be a matter to be settled

between the contractor and potential

subcontractor(s). Such disagreements

are typically handled in this manner in

the commercial sector. The Department

expects that its management and

operating contractors shall handle any