Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16651

1See policies and Rules Concerning Operator

Service Access and Pay Telephone Compensation,

CC Docket No. 91–35, Notice of Proposed Rule

Making, 6 FCC Rcd 1448 (1991), Report and Order

and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 6 FCC

Rcd 4736 (1991); Second Report and Order, 7 FCC

Rcd 3251 (1992); Order on Reconsideration, 7 FCC

Rcd 4355 (1992); and Order on Further

Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, 8 FCC Rcd 2863 (1993) (Further

Reconsideration and FNPRM).

2See Sections 64.1501 to 64.1515 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § § 65.1501–64.1515.

Needs and Uses: Section 76.962

requires cable operators to certify their

compliance with Commission orders

requiring prospective rate reductions,

refunds, or other remedial relief to

subscribers. They must include a

description of precise measures taken to

implement the remedies ordered by the

Commission. This data is used by FCC

to monitor the cable operators

compliance with Commission orders.

OMB Number: 3060–0331.

Title: Section 76.615 Notification

Requirements.

Action: Extension of a currently

approved collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Annual Burden: 2,100

responses; 30 minutes burden per

response; 1050 hours total annual

burden.

Needs and Uses: Section 76.615

requires that cable TV operators notify

the Commission before transmitting any

carrier or other signal component with

an average power level across a 25 kHz

bandwith in any 160 microsecond of

time equal to or greater than 10 –4 watts

at any point in the cable distribution

system on any new frequency or

frequencies in the aeronautical

frequency bands. This information is

used by FCC to locate and eliminate

harmful interference as it occurs, to help

assure safe operation of aeronautical

and marine radio services and to

minimize the possibility of interference

to these safety-of-life services.

OMB Number: 3060–0185.

Title: Section 73.3613.

Action: Extension of a currently

approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Annual Burden: 5,900

responses; 30 minutes burden per

recordkeeper; 2,950 hours total annual

burden.

Needs and Uses: Section 73.3613

requires licensees of TV and low power

TV broadcast stations to file network

affiliation contracts with FCC. All

broadcast stations are required to file

contracts relating to ownership or

control and personnel. Radio licensees

are required to file time brokerage

agreements which result in arrangement

being counted in compliance with local

and national radio multiple ownership

rules. Cetain contracts must be retained

at station. The data is used by FCC to

assure that the licensee maintains full

control over the station.

OMB Number: 3060–0542.

Title: Frequency Coordinator

Evaluation.

Action: Extension of a currently

approved collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit; not-for-profit institutions; State,

Local or Tribal Governments.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Annual Burden: 11,000

responses; 10 minutes per response;

1,826 hours total annual burden.

Needs and Uses: Report and Order

#83–737 requires the Commission to

monitor the performance and quality of

frequency coordination committees

designated for the Private Land Mobile

Radio Service. This evaluation is used

by FCC staff to evaluate the frequency

coordinators process, and service to the

public. The Commission will make

recommendations on any necessary

corrective actions.

OMB Number: 3060–0361.

Title: Section 80.29 Change during

license term.

Action: Extension of a currently

approved collection.

Respondents: Individuals or

households; Business or other for-profit;

Not-for-Profit Institutions; State, Local

or Tribal Government.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Annual Burden: 250

responses; 1 hour burden per response;

250 hours total annual burden.

Needs and Uses: The information is

used by the FCC to update the coast and

ship station license files and data base

concering current name and address of

licensees. Information concerning

changes in the names of vessels is also

used to update the ITU List of Ship

Stations.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–8065 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

[CC Docket No. 91–35; DA 95–620]

Request for Additional Comments on

the Costs and Benefits of International

Blocking for Residential Customers;

Pleading Cycle Established

March 24, 1995.

Comments: April 24, 1995.

Reply Comments: May 8, 1995.

The Commission currently has under

consideration in the above-referenced

docket issues concerning the provision

by local exchange carriers (LECs) of a

service that automatically blocks

international calls.1

In the Further Reconsideration and

FNPRM in CC Docket 91–35, the

Commission request comment on

whether it should require LECs to

provide international blocking to

residential customers in order to

prevent toll fraud. Interested parties

commented on this issue, and the LECs

also provided general information above

the costs and difficulties that they

would incur to provide this service to

residential customers. Parties then

commented on the LECs’ cost claims.

Parties have not, however, commented

about any benefits that residential

customers may receive by using

international blocking for purposes

other than toll fraud prevention.

Since this record was established,

there has been a significant increase in

the number of complaints the

Commission has received about

information services provided through

international toll calls. Such calls are

directly dialed by domestic telephone

subscribers to information providers

located in foreign countries who offer

adult-oriented information services.

These services arose after the

Commission adopted its ‘‘pay-per-call’’

rules in 1991 governing 900 and other

information services.2 The use of

international calls to provide domestic

information services evades important

consumer safeguards in our ‘‘pay-percall’’ and other rules. Such safeguards

include, for example, the requirement

that LECs offer a service that blocks

these calls and that they identify the

calls separately on subscribers’ bills.

Moreover, the Federal Trade

Commission’s ‘‘pay-per-call’’ rules

require information providers to include

a preamble explaining the cost of the

call and to allow the caller to hand up

before charges commence. See 16 C.F.R.

§ § 308.5 (a) and (b).

The Commission hereby asks for

comments on whether, and in what

manner, residential customers would

benefit from having the capability to

block international calls. In particular,

we request comments on whether

residential customers would benefit

from being able to block international

calls in order to limit access to

information services. We also solicit

comments from the LECs on the costs

that the LECs would incur to provide

international blocking capability to
16652 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices

residential customers. The LECs’

comments on costs should include the

categories of costs (e.g., switching,

administration, etc.) that would be

incurred to provide international

blocking capability to all residential

customers. They should also show the

extent to which those costs would be

reduced by not providing blocking in

areas in which it would not be

technically feasible and economically

reasonable to do so. For each instance

in which a LEC claims that it would not

be technically feasible and economically

reasonable to provide residential

blocking, its comments should specify

the type of equipment, the number of

end offices affected, the nature of the

problem (i.e., inadequate switch

memory) and the percentage of

residential access lines that would not

receive international blocking. Also, the

LEC should provide a timeable

indicating when, under its current

investment plans, it would become

technically feasible and economically

reasonable to offer international

blocking to residential customers from

those end offices.

Interested parties may file comments

on these issues no later than April 24,

1995. Replies should be filed by May 8,

1995.

An original and four copies of all

comments and replies must be filed in

accordance with Section 1.51(c) of the

Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.51(c).

In addition, one copy of each pleading

must be filed with International

Transcription Services (ITS), the

Commission’s duplicating contractor, at

its office at 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite

140, Washington, D.C. 20037 and one

copy with the Chief, Tariff Division,

Room 518, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554.

For further information, contact

Thomas G. David, Tariff Division,

Common Carrier Bureau, (202) 418–

1530.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7950 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

The Federal Maritime Commission

hereby gives notice of the filing of the

following agreement(s) pursuant to

section 5 of the Shipping Act of 1984.

Interested parties may inspect and

obtain a copy of each agreement at the

Washington, D.C. Office of the Federal

Maritime Commission, 800 North

Capitol Street, N.W., 9th Floor.

Interested parties may submit comments

on each agreement to the Secretary,

Federal Maritime Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20573, within 10 days

after the date of the Federal Register in

which this notice appears. The

requirements for comments are found in

section 572.603 of Title 46 of the Code

of Federal Regulations. Interested

persons should consult this section

before communicating with the

Commission regarding a pending

agreement.

Agreement No.: 217–011495.

Title: ANZDL/Nedlloyd Space Charter

Agreement.

Parties:

Australia-New Zealand Direct Line

Nedlloyd Lijnen, B.V.

Synopsis: The proposed Agreement

permits the parties to charter space to

and from each other on vessels

operated in the trade between U.S

Pacific Coast ports and inland and

coastal points via such ports, on the

one hand, and ports in Australia and

New Zealand and inland and coastal

points via such ports, on the other.

Agreement No.: 224–200278–001

Title: Port of Oakland/Hyundai

Merchant Marine Co., Ltd., Marine

Terminal Agreement

Parties:

Port of Oakland

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd.

Synopsis: The proposed amendment

removes provisions that require

payment to the Port for empty

containers loaded or discharged from

User’s vessels and the provisions for

additional wharfage refunds to User

in the event User has less than ten

percent (10%) empty twenty foot

equivalent units (TEUs) in a contract

year.

Dated: March 28, 1995.

By Order of the Federal Maritime

Commission.

Joseph C. Polking,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7937 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730–01–7

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Brazosport, Corporation; Acquisition

of Company Engaged in Permissible

Nonbanking Activities

The organization listed in this notice

has applied under § 225.23(a)(2) or (f)

of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR

225.23(a)(2) or (f)) for the Board’s

approval under section 4(c)(8) of the

Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.

1843(c)(8)) and § 225.21(a) of Regulation

Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to acquire or

control voting securities or assets of a

company engaged in a nonbanking

activity that is listed in § 225.25 of

Regulation Y as closely related to

banking and permissible for bank

holding companies. Unless otherwise

noted, such activities will be conducted

throughout the United States.

The application is available for

immediate inspection at the Federal

Reserve Bank indicated. Once the

application has been accepted for

processing, it will also be available for

inspection at the offices of the Board of

Governors. Interested persons may

express their views in writing on the

question whether consummation of the

proposal can ‘‘reasonably be expected to

produce benefits to the public, such as

greater convenience, increased

competition, or gains in efficiency, that

outweigh possible adverse effects, such

as undue concentration of resources,

decreased or unfair competition,

conflicts of interests, or unsound

banking practices.’’ Any request for a

hearing on this question must be

accompanied by a statement of the

reasons a written presentation would

not suffice in lieu of a hearing,

identifying specifically any questions of

fact that are in dispute, summarizing the

evidence that would be presented at a

hearing, and indicating how the party

commenting would be aggrieved by

approval of the proposal.

Comments regarding the application

must be received at the Reserve Bank

indicated or the offices of the Board of

Governors not later than April 14, 1995.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

(Genie D. Short, Vice President) 2200

North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-

2272:

1. Brazosport, Corporation, Freeport,

Texas; to acquire First Commerce

Mortgage Corporation, Corpus Christi,

Texas, and thereby engage in making,

acquiring, or servicing loans for itself or

for others, and loan marketing and

advisory services, pursuant to §

225.25(b)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y.

The geographic scope for these activities

is Corpus Christi, Texas, Brazosport

Area, which includes Freeport, Lake

Jackson and Clute, Texas.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, March 27, 1995.

William W. Wiles,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 95-7915 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-F