15116 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Mr. W.D. Rabe, Commandant (G–MMI),

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100

Second Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001, or may be made by

telephone at (202) 267–1430, or by fax

at (202) 267–1416.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. W.D. Rabe, Marine Investigation

Division, Office of Marine Safety,

Security and Environmental Protection,

telephone, (202) 267–1430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

process by submitting written data,

views, or arguments, or verbal

comments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this notice (CGD

95–023) and the specific question to

which each comment applies, and give

the reason for each comment. Please

submit two copies of all written

comments and attachments in an

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by

11 inches, suitable for copying and

electronic filing.

Drafting Information

The principal persons involved in

drafting the document are Mr. W.D.

Rabe, Project Manager, and Commander

P.A. Popko, Assistant Division Chief,

Merchant Vessel Inspection and

Documentation Division, Office of

Marine Safety, Security and

Environmental Protection.

Background and Purpose

The marine casualty investigation

process is the main feedback loop for

Coast Guard prevention programs. This

measurement function has never been

more important as limited resources

must be focused on those activities

which will be most effective in

minimizing the risks to personnel and

the environment.

Under the authority of 46 U.S.C.

Chapter 63, the Coast Guard conducts

marine casualty investigations. Section

6301 of Title 46, U.S. Code, requires the

Secretary to issue regulations for the

investigation of marine casualties. This

authority has been delegated to the

Coast Guard which has promulgated

regulations and procedures for the

reporting and investigation of marine

casualties. These regulations appear in

46 CFR parts 4 and 5. Under current law

and regulations, the marine industry has

a duty to report marine casualties, as

defined in law and regulations, to the

Coast Guard. There is more confusion

regarding which casualties must be

reported and a general concern that

there is little benefit in reporting and

investigation many of the ‘‘minor’’

casualties.

The Chief, Office of Marine Safety,

Security, and Environmental Protection

has established a Quality Action Team

(QAT) to review the investigation

process. The QAT will examine the

process and recommend improvements.

It will consider public comment during

its review. The review will address

collection and analysis of casualty data,

casualty reporting requirements,

casualty investigation procedures,

investigator training and qualification

requirements, and the use of

investigations for Suspension and

Revocation proceedings, civil penalty

assessments, and potential criminal

prosecutions.

The QAT specifically solicits

responses to the following questions:

1. What changes would you

recommend to the reporting

requirements for marine casualties in 46

CFR part 4?

2. How could the reporting criteria be

improved to help eliminate confusion

concerning which incidents are

reportable to the Coast Guard?

3. How could the Coast Guard satisfy

its need for data collection on marine

casualties while reducing some of the

burden on industry to report casualties?

4. Would electronic or batch reporting

of minor casualties be beneficial?

5. What would be the pros and cons

of limiting Coast Guard activity on

certain casualties to data collection

while reserving in depth investigation to

those casualties from which important

lessons can be learned?

6. What would be the pros and cons

of the Coast Guard not investigating

those cases which the National

Transportation Safety Board is

investigating to reduce duplication of

effort?

The QAT will consult with the marine

industry to obtain insight on where

investigation processes can be improved

to benefit both the Coast Guard and

industry. Small study groups may be

formed, if appropriate, and public

meetings may be held to get input from

a broad interest base. If the Coast Guard

decides to hold public meetings, the

dates, times, and locations will be

announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Dated: March 15, 1995.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Acting Chief, Office of Marine Safety Security

and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 95–6950 Filed 3–21–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2 and 15

[ET Docket No. 95–19; FCC 95–46]

Streamlining the Equipment

Authorization Procedures for Digital

Devices

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposal would

streamline the equipment authorization

requirements for personal computers

and personal computer peripherals by

relaxing the equipment authorization

from certification to a new type of

authorization based on a manufacturer’s

or supplier’s declaration of compliance.

It would also permit authorization of

individual components of personal

computers and would require testing

laboratories to be accredited by the

National Institute of Standards and

technology under its National Voluntary

Laboratory Accreditation Program.

These changes would allow

manufacturers and suppliers to market

new equipment without having to

submit an application for equipment

authorization and await FCC approval.

This would save industry approximately

$250 million annually and would

stimulate the creation of jobs and

competition in the computer industry

by relaxing regulations that are

particularly burdensome for small

businesses.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before June 5, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 5, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

A. Reed, Office of Engineering and

Technology, (202) 776–1627.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making in ET Docket No.

95–19, adopted February 7, 1995, and

released February 7, 1995. The complete

text of this Notice of Proposed Rule

Making is available for inspection and

copying during normal business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules 15117

DC, and also may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street,

NW, Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION: The following

collection of information contained in

this proposed rule has been submitted

to the Office of Management and Budget

for review under Section 3504(h) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3504(h)). Copies of this submission may

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, International

Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140,

Washington, DC 20037. Persons wishing

to comment on this collection of

information should direct their

comments to Timothy Fain, (202) 395–

3561, Office of Management and Budget,

Room 10102 (NEOB), Washington, DC

20503. A copy of any comments filed

with the Office of Management and

Budget should also be sent to the

following address at the Commission:

Federal Communications Commission,

Office of Managing Director, Paperwork

Reduction Project, Washington, DC

20554. For further information contact

Judy Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, (202) 418–0210.

OMB Number: None.

Title: Equipment Authorization—

Declaration of Compliance,

Amendment of Parts 2 and 15.

Form: None.

Action: Proposed new collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other for

profit.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Annual Response: 4000

respondents, 19 hours per response.

Needs and Uses: Data collection will be

used to investigate complaints of

harmful interference to radio

communications and to verify

manufacturer’s or supplier’s

compliance with the rules. The

information collected is essential to

controlling potential interference to

radio communications.

Summary of the Notice of Proposed

Rule Making:

1. In the Notice of Proposed Rule

Making, the Commission proposes to

amend parts 2 and 15 of its rules

regarding the equipment authorization

and testing requirements for personal

computers, personal computer

peripherals and individual components

of personal computers.

2. Personal computers and personal

computer peripheral devices are

currently subject to authorization under

our certification procedure to ensure

that they do not cause interference to

radio services such as TV broadcasting,

aeronautical and maritime

communications, amateur services, etc.

We propose to relax the equipment

authorization procedure for personal

computers and peripherals from

certification to a process based on a

manufacturer’s or supplier’s Declaration

of Conformity (DoC). The DoC is similar

to the current verification procedure

where testing is required to ensure

compliance with the standards. The

DoC would be packaged with the

equipment and would include the

following information: (1) Identification

of the specific product covered by the

declaration; (2) a statement that the

product complies with part 15 of the

FCC rules; (3) identification of the

compliance test report by date and

number; and, (4) identification by name,

address and telephone number of the

manufacturer, importer or other party

located within the U.S. that is

responsible for ensuring compliance

with the rules. Marketing and

importation could begin immediately

following satisfactory testing and

completion of the DoC.

3. In order to provide an additional

safeguard that personal computers and

peripherals continue to comply with the

technical standards, we propose to

require laboratories that perform

measurements on these products to

obtain accreditation by the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST) under its National Voluntary

Laboratory Accreditation Program

(NVLAP). NIST would review the

qualifications of the testing personnel,

quality control procedures, record

keeping and reporting, etc. and send

recognized experts to observe the

testing. Laboratory accreditation is

generally required, either implicitly or

explicitly, under most foreign

government approval systems.

4. We also propose to permit modular

personal computers to be authorized

based on tests and DoCs of the

individual components, i.e., enclosures,

power supplies and mother boards,

without further testing of the completed

assembly. Currently, personal

computers must be tested and

authorized based on the specific

combination of CPU board, power

supply and enclosure used in their

fabrication. Every time this

configuration is changed, separate

testing and authorization is required.

Many computers are now assembled

form modular components. Thus, this

proposal will enable a small

manufacturer or retailer to legally

assemble computers and will also

ensure that components used in the

assembly result in a computer that

complies with the standards. Comments

are invited on specific test procedures

and standards that should be applied to

mother boards, power supplies and

enclosures.

Initital Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

5. As required by section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, the

Commission has prepared an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IFRA)

of the expected impact on small entities

of the proposals suggested in this

document. Written public comments are

requested on the IRFA. These comments

must be filed in accordance with the

same filing deadlines as comments on

the rest of the Notice, but they must

have a separate and distinct heading

designating them as responses to the

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

The Secretary shall send a copy of this

Notice of Proposed Rule Making,

including the Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration in accordance

with paragraph 603(a) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. Pub. L. No. 96–354, 94

Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. section 601 et seq.

(1981).

Reason for action: This rule making

proceeding is initiated to obtain

comments regarding whether and how

the Commission should regulate

computers, peripheral devices to

computers and subassemblies to

computers.

Objectives: The Commission seeks to

determine the standards, test

procedures, and equipment

authorization requirements that should

be applied to computers as well as to

CPU boards, power supplies, and

enclosures used in personal computers

in order: (1) To reduce regulatory

burdens on computer manufacturers; (2)

to remove impediments to flexible

system design and construction

techniques for computer; and (3) to

reduce the potential for interference to

radio services by improving our ability

to ensure that personal computers

comply with our standards.

Legal Basis: The proposed action is

authorized under sections 4(i), 301, 302,

303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i), 301,

302, 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307.

Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements: CPU boards,

power supplies, and enclosures

designed for use in computers are

proposed to be included under our

standards and equipment authorization

requirements. These components, which

were not previously subject to our rules,

will be included under an equipment

authorization procedure similar to our
15118 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

1Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No.

95–22, RM–8355, RM–8392 (Released February 17,

1995), 60 FR 11644, March 2, 1995.

verification procedure with the addition

of a Declaration of Conformity that

would be included with each product

marketed. In addition, we propose to

permit any party to assemble computers

from authorized CPU boards, power

supplies, and enclosures without further

testing provided the instructions

accompanying the components are

followed during assembly. Computers

assembled in this fashion would also be

accompanied by a Declaration of

Conformity. Alternatively, the computer

may be assembled using unauthorized

components provided the resulting

system is tested and accompanied by a

Declaration of Conformity. While the

measurement data, where required,

must be retained by the responsible

party, there is no requirement to file an

application with, and obtain

authorization from, the Commission

prior to marketing or importation.

Accordingly, we expect a significant

decrease in the overall recordkeeping

requirements.

Federal Rules Which Overlap,

Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules:

None.

Description, Potential Impact and

Number of Small Entities Involved: The

actions proposed in this proceeding will

result in a significant decrease in the

amount of testing and Commission

authorization of computer systems.

Currently, every combination of

components used to make a basic

computer system must be tested and

authorized prior to marketing or

importation. This is extremely

burdensome, especially on small

manufacturers. Under the proposal, as

long as authorized components are used

to assemble the computers no additional

testing or Commission authorization

would be required. However, there will

be some impact to the entities that

manufacture computer CPU boards,

power supplies and enclosures. We

estimate there are 50–75 manufacturers

of CPU boards and a similar number of

manufacturers of power supplies. No

estimate is available on the potential

number of manufacturers of enclosures.

Even with this additional impact to the

manufacturers of computer CPU boards,

power supplies and enclosures, the

overall workload will decrease.

Any Significant Alternatives

Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities

Consistent with Stated Objectives: None.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 2

Imports, Radio, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

47 CFR Part 15

Computer technology, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission,

William F. Caton

Acting Secretary

[FR Doc. 95–6965 Filed 3–21–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

47 CFR Part 63

[IB Docket No. 95–22; DA 95–502; RM–8355;

and RM–8392]

Foreign-Affiliated Entities: In the

Matter of Market Entry and Regulation

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission has granted an extension of

time in which to file comments and

reply comments to its Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking on Market Entry

and Regulation of Foreign-Affiliated

Entities. The Commission acted in

response to Telefonica Larga Distancia

de Puerto Rico, Inc.’s (TLD) motion for

an extension of time. Because of the

broad range of complex legal, economic

and policy issues raised in the Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission

recognized the importance of receiving

a complete and balanced presentation

on the numerous issues, and found that

an extension of time would help achieve

this objective. The Commission,

however, limited the extension of time

to two weeks beyond the original due

date for both the comments and reply

comments. In addition to being

concerned about a complete and

balanced presentation on the issues, the

Commission is equally interested in

completing this proceeding in a timely

manner, therefore it limited the

requested extension to two weeks

beyond the original due date.

As a result of the Commission order,

the due date for comments in this

proceeding has been extended to April

11, 1995, and the due date for the reply

comments has been extended May 12,

1995.

DATES: Comments due April 11, 1995;

Reply Comments due May 12, 1995.

ADDRESSES: All comments and reply

comments concerning this Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking 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

Tanner or Ken Schagrin, International

Bureau (202) 418–1470.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order

Adopted: March 15, 1995.

Released: March 15, 1995.

By the Chief, International Bureau: 1.

Telefonica Larga Distancia de Puerto Rico,

Inc. (TLD) requests that the time for filing

Comments and Reply Comments to the

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 1 be extended

four weeks. TRW Inc., IDB Mobile

Communications, Inc., and AmericaTel

Corporation join TLD in this request.

2. This proceeding seeks comments on a

broad range of complex legal, economic and

policy issues involving the entry and

regulation of foreign-affiliated entities in the

U.S. telecommunications market. The issues

raised have been the subject of much debate

in recent years, and the Commission is

interested in receiving a complete and

balanced presentation on the numerous

issues. While the Commission recognizes the

wide range of issues to be addressed, it is

also interested in completing this proceeding

in a timely manner. Therefore, the

Commission will limit the requested

extension of time for Comments and Reply

Comments to two weeks from the original

due dates of March 28, 1995, and April 28,

1995, respectively.

3. Although the Bureau does not routinely

grant extension requests, we find that an

extension of the deadline for Comments to

April 11, 1995, would be beneficial in this

proceeding as it would enable the parties to

fully develop their positions on the many

issues raised in this proceeding. In addition,

the Bureau will extend the deadline for filing

Reply Comments to May 12, 1995. The

parties should note, however, that the Bureau

remains committed to completing this

proceeding in a timely manner and that no

further extensions are contemplated.

4. Accordingly, pursuant to § 0.261 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.261, it is

ordered that the deadline for filing

Comments to the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking is extended to April 11, 1995,

and the deadline for filing Reply Comments

is extended to May 12, 1995.

Federal Communications Commission.

Scott Blake Harris,

Chief, International Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–7017 Filed 3–21–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M