2722 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules

requirements described above within 18

months from such designation.

V. Request for Public Comment

EPA is, by this notice, proposing that

the PM–10 designation for Kootenai

County, excluding the area within the

exterior boundaries of the Coeur

d’Alene Indian Reservation, be revised

from unclassifiable to nonattainment.

On September 22, 1992, EPA previously

provided notice and opportunity for

public comment on a proposed PM–10

nonattainment designation for the City

of Coeur d’Alene, which is located

within Kootenai County (see 57 FR

43846). In response to comments from

the State of Idaho on that proposal, EPA

is now providing an additional

opportunity for public comment on the

expansion of the boundaries to include

all of Kootenai County, excluding the

area within the exterior boundaries of

the Coeur d’Alene Indian Reservation.

EPA is requesting public comment on

all aspects of this proposal including the

appropriateness of the proposed

designation and the scope of the

proposed boundary. Written comments

should be submitted to EPA at the

address identified above by March 13,

1995.

VI. Administrative Review

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

for proposed rules subject to notice and

comment rulemaking an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis describing

the impact of the proposed rule on small

entities. 5 U.S.C. 603–604. The

requirement for preparing such analysis

is inapplicable, however, if the

Administrator certifies that the

proposed rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities (see 5 U.S.C.

605(b)). Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

The redesignation proposed in this

notice does not impose any new

requirements on small entities.

Redesignation is an action that affects

the status of a geographical area and

does not impose any regulatory

requirements on sources. To the extent

that the State must adopt new

regulations, based on an area’s

nonattainment status, EPA will review

the effect those actions have on small

entities at the time the State submits

those regulations. The Administrator

certifies that the approval of the

redesignation action proposed today

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

This action has been classified as a

Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air

and Radiation. The Office of

Management and Budget has exempted

this action from Executive Order 12866

review.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671g.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: December 28, 1994.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–699 Filed 1–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 21, 94, and 101

[WT Docket No. 94–148; FCC 94–314]

Microwave Fixed Radio Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: By this action, the

Commission proposed to simplify the

rules for the common carrier and private

operational fixed microwave services

that are currently contained in separate

Parts of the Commission’s Rules, and to

consolidate those rules into a new Part.

The key objectives of this action are to

restructure the fixed microwave rules so

that they are easier for the public to

understand and use, to conform similar

rule provisions to the maximum extent

possible, to eliminate redundancy, and

to remove obsolete language from the

Commission’s Rules. The Commission is

also reviewing the need for and impact

of certain regulatory requirements and

policies for the common carrier and

private operational fixed microwave

services.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before February 3, 1995. Reply

comments must be submitted on or

before February 21, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert James, Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 634–

1706.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No.

94–148, FCC 94–314, adopted December

9, 1994, and released December 28,

1994. The full text of this Commission

decision is available for inspection and

copying during normal business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street NW., Washington,

DC. The complete text of this decision

also may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street

NW., Washington, DC 20037.

Summary of the Order

1. Common carrier microwave

services and private operational fixed

microwave services share many of the

same frequency bands and use

substantially the same equipment. As a

result of recent changes that are

discussed below, the interference

standards, antenna standards, and

coordination procedures for private and

common carrier fixed microwave

services have further converged. This

rulemaking is an effort to conform filing,

processing, operational, and technical

requirements for services that are

technically similar and, thereby, to gain

significant economies and alleviate

confusion to the public.

2. Communications services that use

the microwave spectrum for fixed

services include common carriers

(currently regulated by Part 21 of the

FCC Rules), common carrier multiple

address systems (Part 22), broadcasters

(Part 74), cable TV operators (Part 78),

and private operational fixed users

(currently regulated by Part 94). The

radio frequency spectrum is allocated

among these services on either a shared

or an exclusive basis. When different

service users have similar needs, they

are sometimes required to share

spectrum bands.

3. Of the services listed above, the

common carrier and private operational

fixed microwave users are the most

similar in technical requirements and

share the most frequency bands. The

convergence of the common carrier and

private operational fixed microwave

technical standards has occurred over

the last decade as a result of several

rulemaking proceedings. See Second

Report and Order in GEN Docket No.

79–188, 48 FR 50322 (1983); Third

Report and Order in GEN Docket No.

82–334, 52 FR 07136 (1987); Third

Report and Order in GEN Docket No.

82–243, 56 FR 34149 (1991); and First

Report and Order in PR Docket No. 83–

426, 50 FR 13338 (1985). Recently, a

further convergence of these two

services occurred as a result of the

reallocation of five bands above 3 GHz
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules 2723

on a co-primary basis to the common

carrier and private operational fixed

microwave licensees that are relocating

from the 1850–1990, 2110–2150, and

2160–2200 MHz bands (2 GHz bands) to

accommodate Personal Communications

Services (PCS) and other emerging

technologies. See Second Report and

Order in ET Docket No. 92–9, 58 Fed.

Reg. 49220 (1993). Although the

emerging technologies proceeding

resolved all the technical issues

necessary for this reallocation, there

were other technical matters raised in

the proceeding, which were not

considered critical to the 2 GHz

microwave users’ relocation to other

regions of the spectrum, that were left

to be settled in a future proceeding.

4. Also, as a result of the emerging

technologies spectrum reallocation and

the resulting increase in frequency

band-sharing, common carrier and

private microwave industry members

have united to develop joint

interference standards and coordination

procedures. For over a year, a

subcommittee of the

Telecommunications Industry

Association’s Fixed Point-to-Point

Microwave Engineering Committee (TIA

TR14.11 Interference Criteria

Engineering Subcommittee) has held

joint meetings with the National

Spectrum Managers Association

(NSMA), a group of frequency

coordinators for Part 21 applicants, to

determine interference criteria for Part

21 and Part 94 users. This collaboration

has resulted in a revised TIA

Telecommunications Systems Bulletin

TSB 10–F, ‘‘Interference Criteria for

Microwave Systems,’’ (TSB 10–F) which

was adopted by the microwave industry

on May 31, 1994. Representatives from

both the TIA fixed microwave group

and the NSMA have met with

Commission staff to discuss the benefits

of common technical standards,

processing procedures, and

consolidated rules for common carrier

and private operational fixed microwave

users.

5. Another factor necessitating this

proceeding is that the majority of the

license application processing for the

Part 21 and Part 94 microwave services

is now being handled by the Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau’s Licensing

Division in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

Because the application processing for

these services was formerly performed

by different Commission offices, the

processing practices and policies

differed. See Public Notice, ‘‘New

Application Processing Practices in the

Common Carrier Point-to-Point

Microwave and Broadcast Auxiliary

Services,’’ DA 93–77, January 27, 1993,

8 FCC Rcd. 775, (1993). This proceeding

seeks to bring uniformity to the fixed

microwave application processing

procedures.

6. The Part 21 and Part 94 rules need

to be consolidated, conformed, and

updated to allow the microwave

industry to operate as efficiently as

possible without being hampered by

obsolete regulations. Because of the

commonality of major portions of the

existing common carrier and private

operational fixed microwave rules and

the industry move to create common

standards and coordination procedures,

we believe it would be beneficial to

consolidate these rules into one

comprehensive part. At the same time,

this proceeding provides us with an

opportunity to improve the organization

of the microwave rules, to simplify

them, to eliminate unnecessary

language, and to make other substantive

amendments.

We expect that a new consolidated

Part 101 will result in major benefits.

First, the public will benefit because of

a much simplified and streamlined

licensing process. Second, the

improvements in processing efficiency

will save scarce Commission resources

and free staff time to improve service to

the public. Third, we expect the

proposed rules to encourage more

efficient use of the microwave spectrum.

Finally, common technical standards for

common carrier and private microwave

equipment may lead to economies of

scale in microwave equipment

production and, thus, lower equipment

prices to users.

7. Proposed Part 101 is approximately

65 percent the volume of the current

common carrier and private radio fixed

microwave rules. This reduction results

from the elimination of repetitive

sections such as definitions, application

procedures, and processing procedures,

the elimination of unnecessary

language, and the consolidation of the

remaining rules. In the paragraphs

below we address the proposed changes

for each subpart and section of the rules,

other than proposed changes that are

editorial in nature or that concern only

renumbering of existing rule language.

8. We welcome comments on whether

the scope of our consolidation effort is

appropriate. We ask that comments

identify the subject of their remarks,

whenever possible, by citing the

proposed section number of a rule (with

cross-reference to the old rule as

necessary). This identification will

expedite and simplify our review of the

comment on the many proposals

contained in this Notice.

General Requirements

9. Definitions. We propose to make

minor editorial changes in the

definitions where appropriate. In

instances where a definition now

appears in more than one rule section

and is phrased inconsistently, we

propose to use the phrasing that we

believe to be the most precise. In cases

where a definition appears in Part 2 of

the Rules as well as in another part, the

proposed Part 101 definition adopts the

Part 2 definition in order to conform

with either the International

Telecommunication Convention or the

international Radio Regulations.

Additionally, we propose to change the

name and all relevant terms related to

the Private Digital Termination System

service to match the name and terms of

the identical Common Carrier Digital

Electronic Message Service. See

proposed Section 101.3.

Applications and Licenses

10. General Application

Requirements. We propose to eliminate

several application showings that are

currently required of common carrier

microwave applicants under Part 21 of

the rules, but which are not essential for

processing these applications. We

request comments on each of these

proposals. First, we propose to

eliminate the financial showing

required under §§ 21.13(a)(2) and 21.17.

Lack of financing has generally not been

a problem in the common carrier

services being transferred to Part 101,

and we consider a certification of

financial ability unnecessary in these

services. Second, we propose

eliminating the public interest showing

required under § 21.13(a)(4). We

tentatively conclude that the public

interest will generally be served by

granting applications in these services

that meet all the Commission’s other

rules and requirements, and that

separate statement form the applicant

pursuant to § 21.13(a)(4) is unnecessary.

We also note that the Commission can

still request a separate public interest

showing if this is deemed necessary in

any particular case. Third, we propose

eliminating the requirement that

applicants submit a copy of any

franchise or other authorization when

such authorizations are required by

local law. See § 21.13(f). We request

comments on whether we should

replace this application showing with a

rule, similar to that contained in Part 22

of the rules, stating that applicants must

comply with all local franchise or

authorization requirements, obtain any

local authorizations by the end of the

construction period, and notify the
2724 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Commission if local authorization is

denied. See § 22.13(f). Fourth, we

propose eliminating showings regarding

control over the station, see § 21.13(g),

and maintenance procedures, see

§ 21.15(e). We request comments on

whether we should replace these

showings with a general rule describing

a licensee’s responsibilities for

maintenance and control of the station

and requiring that maintenance

contracts must be in writing. See

§ 22.205. We also request comments on

whether we should continue to require

the address and telephone number of a

maintenance center or person

responsible for technical operation, see

§ 21.15(e)(1) and Item 18 of FCC Form

494 (‘‘Application for New or Modified

Microwave Radio Station License Under

Part 21’’), or whether this requirement is

unnecessary and should also be deleted.

Fifth, we propose to eliminate the

vertical profile sketch, see § 21.15(c),

and the site availability showing, see

§ 21.15(a), as these showings are not

necessary for processing and lack of site

availability has not been a problem in

the common carrier services being

transferred to Part 101. Sixth, we

request comments on whether the

public interest showing currently

required of applicants in the Point-toPoint Microwave Radio Service

pursuant to § 21.706(a) should be

retained or deleted. We also propose to

allow electronic filing for all fixed

microwave services authorized under

Part 101 as is currently allowed for

private land mobile applications. See

proposed Sections 1.743, 1.913, and

101.37. Finally, we request comments

on what requirements we should adopt

regarding retention or posting of the

station license. See e.g. §§ 21.201,

22.201, and 94.107.

11. Licensee Qualifications and

Consummation of Assignments and

Transfers. Under Part 21, applicants and

licensees are currently required to

provide ownership and character

information on FCC Form 430

(‘‘Licensee Qualification Report’’), see

§ 21.11(a), and to disclose the real party

in interest behind the application

pursuant to § 21.13(a)(1). See also

§ 21.305. We request comment on

precisely what ownership (including

partnership) and character information

we should continue to require of

common carrier applicants and

licensees under the new Part 101. In

addition, under § 21.11 (d), (e), and (f),

applicants are required to complete

assignments or transfers of control

within 45 days of the date of

authorization and to notify the

Commission within 10 days of

consummation. In the common carrier

services being transferred to Part 101,

applicants frequently request extensions

of time to complete assignments or

transfers. Such requests are routinely

granted. Based on this experience, we

request comment on whether the time

for consummation of assignments and

transfers should be extended to 360

days or longer, or whether applicants

should be allowed merely to notify the

Commission of failure to consummate,

rather than requiring applicants to file,

and the Commission to grant, repeated

extension requests. We also propose to

eliminate the requirement for common

carriers to notify the Commission within

10 days of consummation.

12. Commencing Operation. With

regard to the requirement for stations to

be placed in operation within a certain

period after the date of grant, it has been

common practice among some

applicants to request and obtain a

modification of their license and

thereby obtain additional time within

which to be in operation. Some

applicants repeated this procedure

several times, thereby extending their

operational deadline far beyond the

period contemplated by the rules. In

response to these perceived abuses, the

Commission’s Private Radio Bureau

Licensing Division issued a Public

Notice clarifying that a station must be

placed in operation within the time

required by current § 94.51 irrespective

of whether the licensee had been

granted an amendment to its station

authorization. We propose to codify this

longstanding interpretation of our rule.

See proposed Section 101.63.

13. Although current § 94.51 requires

that private fixed microwave stations be

placed in operation within a time

certain, it does not define what

constitutes operation for purposes of the

rules. In the past, several applicants

have argued that the transmission of

color bars or other types of strictly test

signals satisfies the rule’s requirement

of being in operation. This

interpretation has been uniformly

rejected by the staff. Applicants have

also argued that the § 94.51 requirement

of being in operation is satisfied as long

as the station is simply capable of

transmitting intelligence. The staff,

however, has consistently informed the

public that the mere capability of

transmission does not satisfy the

requirement of being in operation. We

are proposing in Section 101.67(d) to

make it clear that only the transmission

of operational signals is sufficient to

satisfy the ‘‘in operation’’ requirement

and that neither the capability of

transmission nor the transmission of

color bars or similar test signals satisfies

the requirement to be in operation. We

are proposing to apply this requirement

to both private and common carrier

fixed microwave users, as the

underlying basis for this proposal,

efficient spectrum usage, applies

equally to both groups. We request

comment on whether this requirement

is necessary or applicable for common

carrier licensees under proposed Part

101.

Technical Standards

14. Frequency Availability Chart. A

new frequency availability chart has

been placed in the proposed rules

(proposed Section 101.101) for the

convenience of licensees and

applicants. In addition to showing the

frequency availability for private and

common carrier users, it also shows

other services, such as broadcast, cable,

PCS, MDS, and ITFS, that share the

same bands. More specific technical

information for the common carrier and

private microwave services are

contained in rule Subparts G through J.

15. Coordination Procedures and

Interference Standards. In the Second

Report and Order in ET Docket 92–9,

the Commission adopted the current

Part 21 coordination procedures and the

current Part 94 interference standards

for the relocated common carrier and

private operational fixed microwave

users. As stated above and in the

Second Report and Order, the common

carrier and private microwave industry

members have united to develop joint

interference standards and coordination

procedures. We propose, therefore, to

apply the same coordination procedures

and interference standards to all bands

for both private and common carrier

fixed microwave services. In addition,

we propose to modify the present

coordination procedures and

interference protection standards to be

consistent with the TIA industry

standards. See proposed §§ 101.103 and

101.105.

16. Transmitter Power Limitations. In

addition to merging the transmitter

power table from Parts 21 and 94, we

also propose to eliminate the values for

maximum allowable transmitter power,

while retaining the values for

Equivalent Isotropic Radiated Power

(EIRP). See proposed § 101.113. We are

proposing to allow a maximum EIRP of

+55 dBW for all point-to-point

microwave bands from 4 GHz to 40

GHz, to allow for increased path

reliability on long paths and to set a

common standard for all bands. See

proposed § 101.113. This proposal is

based partly on TIA recommendations.

Comsearch also proposed a maximum

allowable EIRP of +55 dBW in an earlier
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules 2725

proceeding. Comsearch points out that

in Part 25 of the Rules, the terrestrial

station EIRP used to determine

frequency coordination distance in the

4, 6, and 11 GHz bands is +55 dBW,

which corresponds with the

International Telecommunications (ITU)

Radio Rules and Regulations. The

Commission decided not to act on that

portion of Comsearch’s petition, instead

deferring consideration of maximum

authorized power, antenna standards,

and ATPC to a future proceeding. We

seek comment on whether increasing

the transmitter power limitations as

proposed would have any negative

impact on any radio users.

17. Automatic Transmitter Power

Control. ATPC is a feature of digital

microwave radio that automatically

adjusts transmitter output power based

on path fading detected at the far-end

receiver(s). In the emerging

technologies/relocation proceeding,

commenters proposed that ATPC should

be explicitly authorized in the rules. In

response, the Commission clarified in

the rules that ATPC is permitted up to

a 3 dB increase in power and

encouraged industry groups to explore

in greater detail under what

circumstances ATPC should be

authorized and whether a greater

increase in power than 3 dB would be

appropriate. We have reviewed the

ATPC guidelines in TSB 10–F and are

still uncertain of the necessity of

including explicit provisions for it use

in the rules. We seek comment on

whether it is necessary to have TIA’s

recommendations for ATPC

implementation included in our Rules.

TSB 10–F contains provisions for up to

three different power level

specifications: maximum transmit

power, coordinated transmit power, and

nominal transmit power. We also seek

comment on how these

recommendations for ATPC should be

implemented under our current

licensing scheme, which authorizes

only a single operating power level on

each license, with that power being the

one used in the coordination process. If

the use of ATPC as described in TSB

10–F were to be permitted, what

changes would the Commission have to

make to its forms, licenses, and data

base?

18. Antenna Standards. All antenna

standards for Part 101 services have

been consolidated into one rule section

(proposed section 101.115). Few

substantive changes to the antenna

standards are proposed. In the Docket

92–9 proceeding, commenting parties

raised concerns about our existing

antenna standards, stating that the

category A standards should be updated

and that a new detailed definition of

congested areas should be specified to

maximize efficiency and permit full use

of available bands. The Commission

does not have sufficient information at

this time to propose specific changes to

these standards.

Developmental Authorizations

19. We propose to eliminate the

general requirement that applicants

report on any patents applied for as a

result of a developmental authorization.

This information is in the public

domain when the patent is granted, and

our requirement is, therefore,

duplicative. We also propose to modify

the language concerning the

confidentiality of developmental reports

to make it consistent with our general

rules on requests for confidentiality.

The consolidated rules continue the

prohibition on providing service for hire

with a developmental grant now placed

on common carriers and extends the

prohibition against commercial

operation of a developmental grant to

private radio operations.

20. In this Notice, we have proposed

to amend the regulations for the

common carrier and private operational

fixed microwave services by

consolidating and simplifying their

present rule parts, contained

respectively in Parts 21 and 94 of the

Commission’s Rules, to create a new

Part 101. Our specific proposals are

contained in the rules appendix. We

solicit comment on them. We also invite

comment on any additional changes that

can make the Commission’s microwave

rules more ‘‘user friendly’’ and help the

staff provide improved service to the

public.

21. Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis. Pursuant to the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980, the Commission

finds as follows:

A. Reason for Action

This rulemaking proceeding is

initiated to obtain comment regarding

consolidation and simplification of the

microwave rules not contained in parts

21 and 94 of title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations.

B. Objectives

This action would reduce redundancy

now contained in the rules and remove

obsolete rules and language. It would

also simplify and clarify the

requirements for filing license and other

authorization applications, the

processing of applications and other

requests, and the operation of common

carrier and private operational fixed

microwave stations.

C. Legal Basis

The proposed action is authorized by

Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and 303(r).

D. Description, Potential Impact, and

Number of Small Entities Affected

This reorganization and revision of

the common carrier and private

operational fixed microwave rules will

reduce the volume of the rules by

approximately 25 percent and make

them easier to use and understand. Both

the reduction in volume and

consolidation of the rule should

improve their usefulness as they will be

more easily understood by, and save

research time for, the public. The

benefits would accrue to all interested

parties, large and small entities alike.

We invite specific comment by

interested parties on the likely

magnitude of the impact on small radio

manufacturers and suppliers.

E. Reporting, Record Keeping, and Other

Compliance Requirements

There should be an overall decrease

in reporting, record keeping, and other

compliance requirements. The use of

electronic filing alone should greatly

reduce the amount of paperwork

required to be filed and increase speed

of service.

F. Federal Rules That Overlap,

Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules

None.

G. Significant Alternatives Minimizing

Impact on Small Entities Consistent

With Stated Objectives

The objective of this proceeding is to

minimize confusion, research time,

record keeping and recording for users

of microwave radio frequencies. We are

unaware of other alternatives that would

be as desirable. We solicit comments on

this point.

22. Other Matters. This is a nonrestricted notice and comment

rulemaking proceeding. Ex parte

presentations are permitted, provided

they are disclosed as provided in the

Commission’s rules. See generally 47

CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).

23. This action is taken pursuant to

Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i) and

303(r).

24. Pursuant to applicable procedures

set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of

the Commission’s Rules, interested

parties may file comments on or before

February 3, 1995, and reply comments

on or before February 21, 1995. All

relevant and timely comments will be
2726 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 1995 / Proposed Rules

considered by the Commission before

final action is taken in this proceeding.

To file formally in this proceeding,

participants must file an original and

four copies of all comments, reply

comments, and supporting comments. If

participants want each Commissioner to

receive a personal copy of their

comments, an original plus nine copies

must be filed. Comments and reply

comments should be sent 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 Reference

Center (Room 239) of the Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 1

Administrative practice and

procedure, Communications common

carriers.

47 CFR Part 2

Communications equipment.

47 CFR Part 21

Communications common carriers,

Communications equipment, Radio,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Television.

47 CFR Part 94

Communications equipment, Radio,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

47 CFR Part 101

Communications common carriers,

Communications equipment, Radio,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Television.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–647 Filed 1–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 87–455; RM–5899, RM–

6223, RM–6224, RM–6225, RM–6226, RM–

7111]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Perry,

Cross City, Holiday, Avon Park,

Sarasota, and Live Oak, FL, and

Thomasville, GA

AGENCY: Federal Comminications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document grants a

Motion for Severance filed by Women in

Florida Broadcasting, Inc. concerning

the action in this proceeding upgrading

Station WDFL, Channel 292A, Cross

City, Florida, to specify operation on

Channel 295C1. See 54 FR 30549 (July

21, 1989).

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 11, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Hayne, Mass Media Bureau (202)

634–6530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s

Memorandum Opinion and Order in

MM Docket 87–455, adopted December

27, 1994, and released January 6, 1995.

The full text of this Commission action

is available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center(Room 239), 1919

M Street, NW, Washington, D.C. The

complete text of this action may also be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M

Street, NW, Suite 140, Washington, D.C.

20037.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

Douglas W. Webbink,

Chief, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media

Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–645 Filed 1–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

47 CFR Part 80

[WT Docket No. 94–153; FCC 94–328]

Designate Prince William Sound as a

Radio Protection Area for Mandatory

Vessel Traffic Services (VTS)

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission has

proposed rules to add Prince William

Sound to the United States Coast Guard

(Coast Guard) designated radio

protection areas for mandatory VTS and

establish marine VHF Channel 11 as the

VTS frequency for Prince William

Sound. This action is in response to a

request from the Coast Guard. The

designation of Prince William Sound as

a VTS area will allow the Coast Guard

to manage vessel traffic in a more

efficient manner.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before February 24, 1995; reply

comments on or before March 13, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Shaffer, (202) 418–0680, Private

Radio Bureau.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making FCC 94–328,

adopted December 16, 1994, and

released January 3, 1995. The full text

of this Notice of Proposed Rule Making

is available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center, Room 230, 1919

M. Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text may be purchased from

the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 2100 M Street, Suite 140,

Washington, DC 20037, telephone (202)

857–3800.

Summary of Notice of Proposed Rule

Making

1. The Coast Guard filed a petition

(RM–8199), Public Notice No. 1932,

requesting that the Commission amend

Part 80 of the Rules, 47 CFR part 80, to

add Prince William Sound to the Coast

Guard designated radio protection areas

for mandatory VTS and establish marine

VHF Channel 11 (156.550 MHz) as the

VTS frequency for Prince William

Sound.

2. As a result of the Oil Pollution Act

of 1990, Pub. L. 101–380, 104 Stat. 484,

the Coast Guard plans to implement a

mandatory Automated Dependent

Surveillance (ADS) system for cargo

ships, e.g. oil tankers, that operate in

Prince William Sound. The ADS will

operate as part of the proposed VTS

system and is scheduled to begin

operation in July 1994. An ADS system

works as follows: the vessel determines

its position using a highly accurate

differential GPS receiver and

automatically transmits its position,

identification and the time of the

position to the Coast Guard using digital

selective calling (DSC) techniques on

VHF marine Channel 70 (156.515 MHz).

The Coast Guard needs Channel 11 to

supplement Channel 70 ADS use and

for voice VTS communications in

support of vessel traffic control

operations.

3. Designating Prince William Sound

as a VTS area will allow the Coast

Guard to manage vessel traffic in that

area more efficiently and protect the

marine environment by preventing

vessel collisions and groundings. We are

proposing, therefore, to add Prince

William Sound to the Commission’s list

of designated radio protection areas for

VTS systems specified in Section

80.383. The radio protection area will be

defined as ‘‘The rectangle between

North latitudes 61 degrees 17 minutes

and 59 degrees 22 minutes and West

longitudes 149 degrees 39 minutes and

145 degrees 36 minutes.’’