Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 35971

requirements on the assumption that

they will be applied to BOC provision

of interLATA services to the customers

of its affiliated cellular companies.

Vanguard argues that the interest that a

BOC has in its cellular operations

increases the incentives to engage in

anticompetitive conduct because such

conduct can benefit both its long

distance operations and its cellular

operations. Comptel urges the

Commission to apply to all incidental

interLATA services the same rules

applied to out-of-region interexchange

services because they raise the same

concerns about discrimination and

cross-subsidization.

44. BellSouth’s interpretation of our

reference to CMRS in footnote two of

the BOC Out-of-Region NPRM is correct.

Our statement in the BOC Out-of-Region

NPRM was intended to clarify that a

BOC offering out-of-region long distance

service to unaffiliated CMRS customers

on a stand alone basis would be

considered ‘‘out-of-region’’ services for

purposes of this rulemaking. BOC

provision of interexchange services to

its affiliated CMRS customers is beyond

the scope of this proceeding. We also

reject as beyond the scope of this

proceeding Comptel’s request to apply

the separation requirements to all

‘‘incidental’’ services established under

section 272(g).

B. Definition of Certain Services as InRegion Services

45. Section 271(j) provides that

certain calls that originate out-of-region

will be deemed in-region traffic.

Specifically, this section provides that

‘‘a [BOC] application to provide 800

service, private line service, or their

equivalents that terminate in an inregion State of that [BOC], and allow the

called party to determine the interLATA

carrier, shall be considered an in-region

service subject to the requirements of

subsection (b)(1).’’

46. Comptel argues that the

Commission should declare collect and

third party billed calls to numbers

terminating in the BOC’s region and

BOC calling card calls to in-region

numbers as ‘‘equivalent’’ services and

thus be deemed in-region services.

Comptel’s rationale is that, like 800

number and private line services, the

party paying for the call selects the

interLATA carrier and thus is subject to

the BOCs’ local power. Comptel states

that the Commission should therefore

prohibit the BOC out-of-region affiliate

from completing collect calls, thirdparty billed calls, or BOC calling card

calls to terminating numbers located

within the BOC’s region. Ameritech

opposes Comptel’s interpretation, and

asserts that calling card, collect and

third party calls that are placed from

out-of-region do not fall within 271(j)

because the calling party, not the called

party, determines the long distance

carrier. Ameritech states that the calling

party decides whether to complete the

call on a 0+ basis or use access codes,

and if access codes are used, the calling

party decides which carrier to use.

47. The key factor in determining

whether a service falls within the scope

of section 271(j) as ‘‘equivalent’’ to 800

or private line service is whether the

called party determines the interLATA

carrier that is used. As Ameritech notes,

calling card, collect and third party

billed calls that originate out-of-region

and terminate in-region do not fall

within the scope of section 271(j)

because it is the calling party, not the

called party, that determines the

interLATA carrier. Because the called

party does not determine the interLATA

carrier that is used, there is no

justification for treating such calls as inregion services. Thus, we reject

Comptel’s proposal that we add calling

card, collect and third party calls to

those services classified as ‘‘in-region’’

under section 271(j).

V. Procedural Issues

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

48. We certify that the Regulatory

Flexibility Act is not applicable to the

interim rules we are adopting in this

proceeding. These interim rules will not

result in a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

business entities, as defined by Section

601(3) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Entities subject to the rule changes are

generally large corporations, affiliates of

large corporations, or are dominant in

their fields of operation, and, thus, are

not ‘‘small entities’’ as defined by the

Act. See 15 U.S.C. § 632(a)(1). We are

nevertheless committed to reducing the

regulatory burdens on small

communications services companies

whenever possible, consistent with our

other public interest responsibilities.

The Secretary shall send a copy of this

Report and Order to the Chief Counsel

for Advocacy of the Small Business

Administration in accordance with

Section 605(b) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 601, et seq.

(1981).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

49. The recordkeeping requirements

in this item are contingent upon

approval of the Office of Management

and Budget.

VI. Ordering Clause

50. Accordingly, it is ordered that,

pursuant to Sections 1, 4, 201–205, 215,

218, 220, and 271 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154, 201–

205, 215, 218 and 220, the REPORT

AND ORDER is hereby ADOPTED. The

requirements adopted in this Report and

Order shall be effective 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–17404 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 630

[I.D. 062796B]

Atlantic Swordfish Fishery; Drift Gillnet

Closure

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration,

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS closes the drift gillnet

fishery for swordfish in the Atlantic

Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico

and Caribbean Sea. NMFS has

determined that the adjusted second

semiannual subquota for swordfish that

may be harvested by drift gillnet will be

reached on or before July 17, 1996. This

closure is necessary to prevent

exceeding the quota of swordfish caught

by drift gillnet vessels.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 2330 hours, local time,

July 17, 1996, through 2400 hours, local

time, November 30, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ronald G. Rinaldo, 301-713- 2347.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Atlantic swordfish fishery is managed

under the authority of the Magnuson

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and the

Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (16

U.S.C. 971 et seq.).

The implementing regulations at 50

CFR 630.24(b)(3)(ii) establish a quota of

swordfish that may be harvested by drift

gillnet during the period July 1 through

November 30, each year. Under 50 CFR

630.25(a), NMFS is required to close the

drift gillnet fishery for swordfish when

its quota is reached, or is projected to

be reached, by filing a closure
35972 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

announcement with the Office of the

Federal Register at least 14 days before

the closure is to become effective.

The 1996 swordfish Total Allowable

Catch (TAC) allows for an Atlantic

swordfish drift gillnet subquota of 22.5

mt dressed weight (49,603.5 lb) for the

January 1 to June 30 period, and a

subquota of 23.45 mt dressed weight

(51,697.8 lb) for the July 1 to November

30 period. Our estimates indicate that

only approximately 18,000 lb (8.164 mt)

was caught during the first period

subquota. The remaining portion of the

first period subquota will be rolled over

to the second period, for an adjusted

second period subquota of 37.785 mt

dressed weight, or 83,301.3 lb.

Based on the current level of

swordfish catch by drift gillnets and

historic data on catch per set for July,

NMFS has determined that the drift

gillnet quota for the July 1 through

November 30 period will be reached on

or before July 17, 1996. Hence, the drift

gillnet fishery for Atlantic swordfish is

closed effective 2330 hours, local time,

July 17, 1996, through 2400 hours, local

time, November 30, 1996.

During this closure of the drift gillnet

fishery: 1) no one aboard a vessel using

or having onboard a drift gillnet may

fish for swordfish from the North

Atlantic swordfish stock; 2) no more

than two swordfish per trip may be

possessed on board vessel using or

having onboard a drift gill net in the

North Atlantic Ocean, including the

Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, north

of 5° N. lat., or landed in an Atlantic,

Gulf of Mexico, or Caribbean coastal

state.

Classification

This action is required by 50 CFR

630.25(a) and is exempt from review

under E.O. 12866.

Dated: July 2, 1995.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Director, Office of Fisheries

Conservation and Management, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 96–17350 Filed 7–03–96; 11:47 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F