Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 117 / Monday, June 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 30531

TABLE 2.—FEDERAL FACILITIES SECTION, JUNE 1996—Continued

State Site name City/county Notes(a)

UT ................. Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) ............................................. Ogden ................................................................................. C

UT ................. Tooele Army Depot (North Area) ....................................... Tooele

VA ................. Defense General Supply Center (DLA) .............................. Chesterfield County

VA ................. Fort Eustis (US Army) ........................................................ Newport News

VA ................. Langley Air Force Base/NASA Langley Cntr ..................... Hampton

VA ................. Marine Corps Combat Development Command ................ Quantico

VA ................. Naval Surface Warfare—Dahlgren ..................................... Dahlgren

VA ................. Naval Weapons Station—Yorktown ................................... Yorktown

WA ................ American Lake Gardens/McChord AFB ............................. Tacoma ............................................................................... C

WA ................ Bangor Naval Submarine Base .......................................... Silverdale

WA ................ Bangor Ordinance Disposal (US NAVY) ............................ Bremerton

WA ................ Bonneville Power Admin Ross (USDOE) ........................... Vancouver ........................................................................... C

WA ................ Fairchild Air Force Base (4 Waste Areas) ......................... Spokane County

WA ................ Fort Lewis Logistics Center ................................................ Tillicum

WA ................ Hanford 100-Area (USDOE) ............................................... Benton County

WA ................ Hanford 1100-Area (USDOE) ............................................. Benton County

WA ................ Hanford 200-Area (USDOE) ............................................... Benton County

WA ................ Hanford 300-Area (USDOE) ............................................... Benton County

WA ................ Jackson Park Housing Complex (USNAVY) ...................... Kitsap County

WA ................ McChord Air Force Base (Wash Rack/Treat) .................... Tacoma ............................................................................... C

WA ................ Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island (Ault) ............................ Whidbey Island

WA ................ Naval Undersea Warfare Station (4 Areas) ....................... Keyport

WA ................ Old Navy Dump/Manchester Lab (USEPA/NOAA) ............ Manchester

WA ................ Port Hadlock Detachment (USNAVY) ................................ Indian Island

WA ................ Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Complex .............................. Bremerton

WV ................ Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (USNAVY) .......................... Mineral

WV ................ West Virginia Ordinance (USARMY) .................................. Point Pleasant .................................................................... S

WY ................ F.E. Warren Air Force Base ............................................... Cheyenne

(a) A = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (if scored, HRS score need not be >

28.50).

C = Sites on construction completion list.

S = State top priority (included among the 100 top priority sites regardless of score).

[FR Doc. 96–15032 Filed 6–14–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter I

[FCC 96–240]

Subsidiary Accounting Requirements

Concerning Video Dialtone Costs and

Revenues for Local Exchange Carriers

Offering Video Dialtone Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This Memorandum Opinion

and Order requires LECs to change the

classification of asynchronous transfer

mode (ATM) switches from circuit

equipment to switching equipment for

the purposes of assigning investment to

accounts in the Uniform System of

Accounts. This Memorandum Opinion

and Order disposes of six Applications

for Review filed by or on behalf of local

exchange carriers. The Memorandum

Opinion and Order is intended to clarify

the proper accounting treatment for the

local exchange carriers’ investment in

ATM equipment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas David, Tariff Division, Common

Carrier Bureau, (202) 418–0850.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s

Memorandum Opinion and Order

adopted May 29, 1996, and released

May 30, 1996. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Public

Reference Room (Room 230), 1919 M

St., N.W., Washington, D.C. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, International

Transcription Service, Suite 140, 2100

M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037.

Summary of Report and Order

BellSouth, Southwestern Bell and

NARUC challenge the Bureau’s previous

determination in Responsible

Accounting Officer Letter 25 that ATM

equipment should be classified as

circuit equipment. The Commission

agrees that certain types of ATM

switching equipment route video signals

along transmission paths and thus

should be classified as switching

equipment. The Commission further

found that other ATM equipment used

for video applications should be

classified based on its function or use as

either switching or circuit equipment.

Ordering Clauses

1. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections

4(i), 4(j), and 220 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j),

and 220 and Section 1.115 of our rules,

47 C.F.R. § 1.115, it is ordered that the

Applications for Review filed by Bell

Atlantic Telephone Companies,

BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.,

GTE Service Corporation, National

Telephone Cooperative Association,

Southwestern Bell Telephone Company,

and US West Communications, Inc. on

or before May 3, 1995 are granted to the

extent indicated in this Order and to the

extent not granted, are dismissed.

It is further ordered that, pursuant to

Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 220 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j),

220, and Sections 1.3 and 32.18 of our

rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3 and 32.18, the

Petition for Waiver filed by US West

Communications Inc. on September 5,

1995 is dismissed.
30532 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 117 / Monday, June 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–15267 Filed 6–14–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket No. 95–144; FCC 96–219]

UHF Noise Figure Performance

Measurements

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: By this action, the

Commission modified its rules to

eliminate the requirement that parties

who manufacture, import or market

television receivers file reports

concerning the UHF noise figure

performance of recently-introduced

models. We found that the requirement

for the filing of UHF television noise

figure performance measurements had

become obsolete and burdensome. By

eliminating this requirement we

anticipate that the administrative

burden on industry as well as on the

Commission will be greatly reduced

without any deterioration of the

television receiver compliance rate.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 16, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Raymond A. LaForge at (202) 418–2417,

Office of Engineering and Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order, adopted May 14, 1996, and

released June 3, 1996. 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, N.W., Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037.

Summary of Report and Order

1. The Electronics Industry

Association Consumer Electronics

Group, now known as the Consumer

Electronics Manufacturers Association

(‘‘CEMA’’), petitioned the Commission

to eliminate the requirement that parties

who manufacture, import or market

television receivers file reports

concerning the UHF noise figure

performance of television receivers. On

September 5, 1995, the Commission

issued a Notice of Proposed Rule

Making (‘‘NPRM’’), 60 FR 49421,

September 22, 1995, proposing to

eliminate the requirement that parties

who manufacture, import, or market

television receivers file UHF television

noise figure measurement reports.

2. CEMA, the only entity to file

comments and reply comments

supported the Commission’s proposal to

eliminate the UHF noise figure reporting

requirements stating that this initiative

furthers the Administration’s regulatory

reinvention goals by minimizing the

reporting burdens on business. It stated

that both industry and Commission

resources could be redeployed for other

business if the UHF noise figure

reporting requirement is eliminated.

3. CEMA also noted that the UHF

noise figure reporting requirement is

inconsistent with the Commission’s

verification process. It states that under

this process manufacturers and

importers of television receivers must

maintain records of the results of their

tests, although they are not required to

submit sample products or test reports

to the Commission unless specifically

requested by the Commission. However,

the UHF noise figure reporting

requirement obligates manufacturers

and importers to compile test

measurement data on UHF noise figures

for each model during the first year of

its introduction and to file these

performance measurements with the

Commission. CEMA maintained that the

requirement for filing this data is

inconsistent with the concept of selfapproval, which is the heart of the

verification process. CEMA argued that

the verification process and market

forces are therefore sufficient to ensure

compliance with the UHF noise figure

requirement. Based on the record, we

agree with CEMA that the filing of

performance measurement data is no

longer necessary to ensure compliance

with our UHF noise figure requirement.

Thus, we are amending our rules to

eliminate Section 15.117(g)(3).

4. Accordingly, it is ordered, that Part

15 of the Commission’s Rules and

Regulations ARE AMENDED as

specified below, effective August 16,

1996. The authority for issuance of this

Report and Order is contained in

Sections 4(i), 302, 303 (c), (f), (g), and

(r), and 309(a) of the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.

Sections 154(i), 302, 303 (c), (f), (g), and

(r).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 603, an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was

incorporated in the NPRM in ET Docket

No. 95–144, FCC 95–389, 60 FR 49421,

September 22, 1995. Written comments

on the proposal in the NPRM, including

the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,

were requested. Only one comment and

one reply comment were submitted by

the petitioner, CEMA.

1. Need for and Objective of Rules.

Our objectives are to decrease the

administrative burden on manufacturers

and importers by eliminating the

requirement for submission of

performance data to demonstrate

compliance with the Commission’s UHF

noise figure requirement. We believe

this requirement is no longer necessary

to ensure compliance. Therefore, by

eliminating the requirement for

manufacturers and importers to develop

and file this data with the Commission,

we expect to greatly reduce the

administrative burden on industry as

well as on the Commission.

2. Issues Raised by the Public in

Response to the Initial Analysis. The

petitioner was the only party to offer

comments to the proposal raised in the

NPRM, but the Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis was not raised as an

issue.

3. Any Significant Alternative

Minimizing Impact on Small Entities

and Consistent with Stated Objectives.

The alternative to amending Part 15 of

the Commission’s Rules is to continue

the requirement that performance data

be filed with the Commission to

demonstrate compliance with the UHF

noise figure requirement. However, this

would result in a missed opportunity to

remove an unnecessary administrative

burden on industry.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

Radio, Reporting and recordkeping

requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Rule Changes

Title 47 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, Part 15, is amended as

follows:

PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY

DEVICES

1. The authority citation for Part 15

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 302, 303, 304, 307 and

624A of the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 304, 307

and 544A.

2. Section 15.117 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph (g)(3).

[FR Doc. 96–15210 Filed 6–14–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P